MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mobility Aware Edge Computing Segmentation Towards Localized Orchestration

2021· preprint· en· W3207104282 on OpenAlexaff
Sam Aleyadeh, Abdallah Moubayed, Abdallah Shami

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrchestrationComputer scienceEdge computingCloud computingDistributed computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer networkLow latency (capital markets)Edge deviceSegmentationLatency (audio)Artificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The current trend in end-user device’s advancements in computing and communication capabilities makes edge computing an attractive solution to pave the way for the coveted ultra-low latency services. The success of the edge computing networking paradigm depends on the proper orchestration of the edge servers. Several Edge applications and services are intolerant to latency, especially in 5G and beyond networks, such as intelligent video surveillance, E-health, Internet of Vehicles, and augmented reality applications. The edge devices underwent rapid growth in both capabilities and size to cope with the service demands. Orchestrating it on the cloud was a prominent trend during the past decade. However, the increasing number of edge devices poses a significant burden on the orchestration delay. In addition to the growth in edge devices, the high mobility of users renders traditional orchestration schemes impractical for contemporary edge networks. Proper segmentation of the edge space becomes necessary to adapt these schemes to address these challenges. In this paper, we introduce a segmentation technique employing lax clustering and segregated mobility-based clustering. We then apply latency mapping to these clusters. The proposed scheme’s main objective is to create subspaces (segments) that enable light and efficient edge orchestration by-reducing the processing time and the core cloud communication overhead. A bench-marking simulation is conducted with the results showing decreased mobility-related failures and reduced orchestration delay.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207