MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226072887 · doi:10.1109/tcss.2022.3161627

A DRL-Based Service Offloading Approach Using DAG for Edge Computational Orchestration

2022· article· en· W4226072887 on OpenAlexaff
M. S. Mekala, Gaurav Dhiman, Gautam Srivastava, Zulqar Nain, Haolin Zhang, Wattana Viriyasitavat, G. P. Saradhi Varma

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersMinistry of Science, ICT and Future PlanningMinistry of Education
KeywordsOrchestrationComputer scienceService (business)Edge computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionDistributed computingComputer networkArtificial intelligenceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Edge infrastructure and Industry 4.0 required services are offered by edge-servers (ESs) with different computation capabilities to run social application's workload based on a leased-price method. The usage of Social Internet of Things (SIoT) applications increases day-to-day, which makes social platforms very popular and simultaneously requires an effective computation system to achieve high service reliability. In this regard, offloading high required computational social service requests (SRs) in a time slot based on directed acyclic graph (DAG) is an NP-complete problem. Most state-of-art methods concentrate on the energy preservation of networks but neglect the resource sharing cost and dynamic subservice execution time (SET) during the computation and resource sharing. This article proposes a two-step deep reinforcement learning (DRL)-based service offloading (DSO) approach to diminish edge server costs through a DRL influenced resource and SET analysis (RSA) model. In the first level, the service and edge server cost is considered during service offloading. In the second level, the R-retaliation method evaluates resource factors to optimize resource sharing and SET fluctuations. The simulation results show that the proposed DSO approach achieves low execution costs by streamlining dynamic service completion and transmission time, server cost, and deadline violation rate attributes. Compared to the state-of-art approaches, our proposed method has achieved high resource usage with low energy consumption.

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)0.000
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations40
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Computational Social SystemsSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207