Energy Aware Load Balancing Framework for Smart Grid Using Cloud and Fog Computing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data centers are producing a lot of data as cloud-based smart grids replace traditional grids. The number of automated systems has increased rapidly, which in turn necessitates the rise of cloud computing. Cloud computing helps enterprises offer services cheaply and efficiently. Despite the challenges of managing resources, longer response plus processing time, and higher energy consumption, more people are using cloud computing. Fog computing extends cloud computing. It adds cloud services that minimize traffic, increase security, and speed up processes. Cloud and fog computing help smart grids save energy by aggregating and distributing the submitted requests. The paper discusses a load-balancing approach in Smart Grid using Rock Hyrax Optimization (RHO) to optimize response time and energy consumption. The proposed algorithm assigns tasks to virtual machines for execution and shuts off unused virtual machines, reducing the energy consumed by virtual machines. The proposed model is implemented on the CloudAnalyst simulator, and the results demonstrate that the proposed method has a better and quicker response time with lower energy requirements as compared with both static and dynamic algorithms. The suggested algorithm reduces processing time by 26%, response time by 15%, energy consumption by 29%, cost by 6%, and delay by 14%.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".