MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320713349 · doi:10.1109/tgcn.2023.3244710

Energy Aware Task Allocation for Semi-Asynchronous Mobile Edge Learning

2023· article· en· W4320713349 on OpenAlexaff
Umair Mohammad, Sameh Sorour, Mohamed Hefeida

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersU.S. Department of Transportation
KeywordsAsynchronous communicationComputer sciencesyncEnergy consumptionEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionTask (project management)Resource allocationSynchronization (alternating current)Distributed computingConstraint (computer-aided design)Asynchrony (computer programming)Real-time computingComputer networkChannel (broadcasting)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper extends the paradigm of “mobile edge learning (MEL)” by designing an energy-aware optimal task allocation scheme for training a machine learning (ML) model in a semi-asynchronous manner across multiple learners connected via the resource-constrained wireless edge network. The tasks are allocated such that the local dataset size selected at each learner ensures completion within a given global delay constraint and a local maximum energy consumption limit. Hence, the designed method is heterogeneity aware (HA) because it offers a trade-off between resource consumption and MEL performance by directly relating the time and energy consumption to the heterogeneous communication/computational capabilities of learners. Because the resulting optimization is an NP-hard quadratically-constrained integer linear program (QCILP), a two-step suggest-and-improve (SAI) solution is proposed. The proposed HA semi-asynchronous (HA-Asyn) approach is compared against the HA synchronous (HA-Sync) scheme and the heterogeneity unaware (HU) synchronous/asynchronous (HU-Sync/Asyn) equal batch allocation schemes. Results from a system of 20 learners tested for various completion time and energy consumption constraints show that the proposed HA-Asyn method works better than the HU-Sync/Asyn approaches and can even provide gains of up-to 25% compared to the HA-Sync scheme.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Green Communications and NetworkingSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207