Energy-Efficient D2D-Aided Fog Computing under Probabilistic Time Constraints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Device-to-device (D2D) communication is an enabling technology for fog computing by allowing the sharing of computation resources between mobile devices. However, temperature variations in the device CPUs affect the computation resources available for task offloading, which unpredictably alters the processing time and energy consumption. In this paper, we address the problem of resource allocation with respect to task partitioning, computation resources and transmit power in a D2D-aided fog computing scenario, aiming to minimize the expected total energy consumption under probabilistic constraints on the processing time. Since the formulated problem is non-convex, we propose two sub-optimal solution methods. The first method is based on difference of convex (DC) programming, which we combine with chance-constraint programming to handle the probabilistic time limitations. Considering that DC programming is dependent on a good initial point, we propose a second method that relies on only convex programming, which eliminates the dependence on user-defined initialization. Simulation results demonstrate that the latter method outperforms the former in terms of energy efficiency and run-time.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".