A Holistic QoS View of Crowdsourced Edge Cloud Platform
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Edge clouds have become a de-facto paradigm to deliver low and stable networks to delay-critical applications such as web services and AR/VR. A unique form of edge clouds is those crowdsourced from third parties, e.g., idle PCs or workstations. Such crowdsourced edge platforms can better sink computations closer to users, reduce the purchase cost, and eliminates the carbon generated during manufacturing. Yet, they also face the challenge of out-of-control hardware, e.g., a server dropping in/out anytime. In this paper, we perform the first-of-its-kind measurement of Quality of Service (QoS) for a large-scale crowdsourced edge platform, which covers over 10,000 edge servers, 100,000 users and 10,000,000 user requests. The measurement takes a holistic QoS view: (1) First, we look at how much hardware resources are provided by edge servers, how much time they are available for service deployment, and what are the major abnormal behaviors. (2) Second, we analyze the factors affecting service stability and quantify the resource utilization pattern of containerized services hosted on those edge servers. (3) Third, we investigate the spatial and temporal features of user requests handled by the platform. Many useful and somehow surprising findings are obtained through the above measurements. We also derive insightful implications that could help edge platforms and edge applications to better deliver their services to users.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".