A Comprehensive Review of Computing Paradigms, Enabling Computation Offloading and Task Execution in Vehicular Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Road safety, optimized traffic management, and passenger comfort have always been the primary goals of the vehicle networking research community. Advances in computer and communication technologies have made the dream of modern intelligent vehicles a reality through the use of smart sensors, cameras, networking devices, and storage capabilities. Autonomous operation of modern intelligent vehicles requires massive computations where tasks are outsourced. In recent years, various computing paradigms, e.g., mobile cloud computing (MCC), vehicular cloud computing (VCC), multi-access or mobile edge computing (MEC), vehicular edge computing (VEC), vehicular fog computing (VFC), and volunteer computing based VANET (VCBV), have been developed to move computational resources close to the user and handle the delay-sensitive applications of modern intelligent vehicles. Therefore, in this study, we provide a comprehensive overview of all computing paradigms related to vehicular networks. We also present the architectural details, similarities, differences, and key features of each computing paradigm. Finally, we conclude the study with open research challenges in vehicular networks along with future research directions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".