MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Task Scheduling for ICN-Based Computing First Network: A Deep Reinforcement Learning Approach

2022· article· en· W4328027908 on OpenAlexaff
Zhuang Zou, Renchao Xie, Yuzheng Ren, F. Richard Yu, Tao Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing Municipality
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningDistributed computingScheduling (production processes)Markov decision processComputer networkDynamic priority schedulingEdge computingScheduleTask analysisMarkov processTask (project management)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionQuality of serviceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The computing first network (CFN) combines heterogeneous computing force information with network information and improves resource utilization and task execution efficiency through resource perception, service positioning, and task scheduling. However, since the heterogeneous computing force is difficult to express and perceive, and it is distributed on each node of the edge network, it is difficult to schedule tasks uniformly. Therefore, this paper proposes a CFN architecture based on information-centric network (ICN), which uses the naming mechanism of ICN to characterize the computing force and tasks, and the caching mechanism and routing and forwarding mechanism to improve the computing efficiency in the network. Under this network architecture, we study the scheduling problem of multi-user tasks in a period, model it as a multi-objective optimization model, and transform it into a Markov decision process (MDP) to enable control nodes to prioritize tasks and then schedule them to computing nodes for execution, which takes into account the task queue status and node resources. To solve the proposed problem, we use the deep reinforcement learning algorithm to approximate the optimal task scheduling solution. Finally, extensive simulation experiments are conducted to validate the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed 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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207