MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Worker Resource Characterization Under Dynamic Usage in Multi-access Edge Computing

2022· article· en· W4285813806 on OpenAlexafffund
Ruslan Kain, Sameh Sorour

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBenchmark (surveying)Task (project management)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge computingResource allocationResource (disambiguation)Distributed computingQuality of serviceEdge deviceResource management (computing)Cloud computingComputer networkArtificial intelligenceEngineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC), also known as Mobile Edge Computing, has gained significant momentum as a key facilitator of the stringent Quality of Service (QoS) requirements associated with delay-sensitive and data-intensive applications. Recently, the advantageous nature of MEC has been further enriched by leveraging the latent yet underused computational resources of Extreme Edge Devices (EEDs), such as smartphones, tablets, and autonomous vehicles. However, EEDs are typically user-owned devices, and thus have dynamic resource usage behavior since users dynamically navigate through various applications on their devices. This, along with the heterogeneity of EEDs, makes it harder to accurately estimate their computational capabilities, drastically affecting task allocation and resource utilization, thus increasing the delay. In this paper, we propose the Usage-based WOrker Resource Characterization (U-WORC) scheme to alleviate this problem and address the issues related to device heterogeneity, resource contention, and network communication delay. U-WORC presents a prediction-based approach to characterize the resources of EEDs (i.e., workers) by clustering the resource usage information and the corresponding execution time while running a benchmark task. Performance evaluation shows that U-WORC yields significant improvements that reach 91.42 % and 38.8 % in terms of characterization accuracy and task execution time, respectively, compared to a prominent scheme that does not consider resource contention and network communication delay.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.872
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.010
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · 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.

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing (IWCMC)Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207