Joint VNF Parallelization and Deployment in Mobile Edge Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile edge computing (MEC) has emerged as a promising computing paradigm that provides flexible and responsive local services for mobile user equipment at the network edge. Software instances for user equipment tasks are typically deployed as Virtualized Network Functions (VNFs) at resource-constrained edge nodes. Task data exchanged across the VNFs in serial can incur high task completion latency. It is therefore desirable to deploy certain VNFs in parallel. However, deciding where to deploy VNFs depends on which VNFs are parallel, and conversely, their deployment also affects their parallel execution. In this paper, for the first time, we jointly consider the parallelization and deployment strategies for VNFs at edge nodes. We closely examine the complexity of the joint optimization problem and introduce an Improved Service Function Graph (I-SFG) that reflects the coordination and dependency relations among the VNFs to provide parallel services for each piece of user equipment. We first propose an approach based on integer linear programming to find optimal solutions in small-scale scenarios and then present an effective solution through cascading I-SFG construction and VNF deployment approximation to solve large-scale problems. Theoretical analyses and experimental results show the superiority of our joint design and the proposed practical solution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".