MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3216098349 · doi:10.1109/swc50871.2021.00032

Can Learning-Based Hybrid DVFS Technique Adapt to Different Linux Embedded Platforms?

2021· article· en· W3216098349 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Ramegowda, Man Lin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGreen IT and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEmbedded systemLaptopFrequency scalingOperating systemReinforcement learningEnergy consumptionEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increased use of embedded platforms powered by Linux, battery life has become one of the central focuses in research and innovation. Towards this, dynamic voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) has emerged as a powerful technique. However, reinforcement learning-based hybrid DVFS techniques for Mixed Task sets are hardly investigated, considering Linux operating systems targeted on embedded platforms. This paper illustrates an experimental analysis of an energy reduction technique using hybrid learning-based DVFS methodology for Mixed Task sets on Linux Embedded Platforms with ARM and Intel architectures. We analyze the hybrid DVFS approach using reinforcement learning to handle a Mixed Task set on Linux platforms and evaluate the algorithms on various real-time devices. Results show that we can successfully apply the extended hybrid DVFS technique on real-time Linux embedded platforms, i.e., Dell Laptop, Raspberry Pi, and Beagle Bone Platform, all focusing on energy saving. Over 3% energy savings can be achieved for a standard real-time scheduling mechanism without any penalty in application throughput. We believe that our implementation might potentially lead to a number of innovative applications that use Learning-based DVFS algorithms targeted on Linux real embedded hardware.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.731
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGreen IT and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207