MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205938345 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3137291

Performance Optimization of Serverless Computing for Latency-Guaranteed and Energy-Efficient Task Offloading in Energy-Harvesting Industrial IoT

2021· article· en· W4205938345 on OpenAlexaff
Haneul Ko, Sangheon Pack, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Research Foundation of KoreaNational Research Foundation
KeywordsComputer scienceMarkov decision processLatency (audio)Task (project management)Stateless protocolDistributed computingCloud computingLinear programmingMarkov processComputer networkReal-time computingOperating systemAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serverless architecture enables various intelligent applications to be run without managing infrastructure. In this architecture, the computing cost is generally proportional to the number of requested stateless functions and this number can affect the task completion time and, thus, it is prominent to decide an appropriate number of requested stateless functions. In this article, we propose a latency-guaranteed and energy-efficient task offloading (LETO) system where an Internet of Things (IoT) device decides the number of stateless functions requested to the cloud by considering the deadline on the task completion time and its energy level. To minimize the computing cost while guaranteeing sufficiently short task completion time and low energy outage probability, we formulate a constrained Markov decision process (CMDP) problem and convert the CMDP problem into an equivalent linear programming (LP) model. By solving the LP model, the optimal policy on the number of requested stateless functions can be achieved. Evaluation results illustrate that LETO can cut down the operating expenditure (OPEX) by up to 59% compared to a latency-guaranteed offloading scheme while keeping the task completion time and the energy outage probability below desirable levels.

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)0.001
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations43
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207