MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205790976 · doi:10.3390/s22020660

ENERDGE: Distributed Energy-Aware Resource Allocation at the Edge

2022· article· en· W4205790976 on OpenAlexaff
Marios Avgeris, Dimitrios Spatharakis, Dimitrios Dechouniotis, Aris Leivadeas, Vasileios Karyotis, Symeon Papavassiliou

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsComputer scienceDistributed computingBottleneckCloud computingMobile edge computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge computingOrchestrationEnergy consumptionResource allocationWorkloadTask (project management)Computer networkEmbedded systemEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile applications are progressively becoming more sophisticated and complex, increasing their computational requirements. Traditional offloading approaches that use exclusively the Cloud infrastructure are now deemed unsuitable due to the inherent associated delay. Edge Computing can address most of the Cloud limitations at the cost of limited available resources. This bottleneck necessitates an efficient allocation of offloaded tasks from the mobile devices to the Edge. In this paper, we consider a task offloading setting with applications of different characteristics and requirements, and propose an optimal resource allocation framework leveraging the amalgamation of the edge resources. To balance the trade-off between retaining low total energy consumption, respecting end-to-end delay requirements and load balancing at the Edge, we additionally introduce a Markov Random Field based mechanism for the distribution of the excess workload. The proposed approach investigates a realistic scenario, including different categories of mobile applications, edge devices with different computational capabilities, and dynamic wireless conditions modeled by the dynamic behavior and mobility of the users. The framework is complemented with a prediction mechanism that facilitates the orchestration of the physical resources. The efficiency of the proposed scheme is evaluated via modeling and simulation and is shown to outperform a well-known task offloading solution, as well as a more recent one.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations30
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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