MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Holistic QoS View of Crowdsourced Edge Cloud Platform

2023· article· en· W4385329436 on OpenAlexaff
Shihao Shen, Yicheng Feng, Mengwei Xu, Cheng Zhang, Xiaofei Wang, Wenyu Wang, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceServerQuality of serviceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionCloud computingEdge computingEdge deviceComputer networkService (business)Software deploymentDistributed computingOperating systemTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.222 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations17
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207