Device-Specific QoE Enhancement Through Joint Communication and Computation Resource Scheduling in Edge-Assisted IoT Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With rapid adoption in vertical industries and further assistance of edge computing, Internet-of-Things (IoT) applications are experiencing phenomenal growth. However, the concurrence of heterogeneous IoT devices, limited system resources, and varying network conditions poses an ultimate challenge to resource scheduling for meeting the increasingly diverse requirements of IoT applications. Most existing resource scheduling techniques are achieved using common performance indicators for all devices as the optimization objective, which may lose effectiveness when dealing with the diverse requirements across heterogeneous IoT devices. Towards this end, we focus on enhancing IoT device-specific Quality of Experience (QoE) through jointly optimizing communication and computation resources. First, a three-layer QoE assessment model is constructed to characterize the general correlation between resource provisioning and device-specific QoE. Then, to maximize the overall QoE amongst IoT devices, a two-stage resource scheduling scheme is proposed to realize the simultaneous optimization of IoT devices and the edge system. Specifically, during stage I, a distributed resource scheduling algorithm with low complexity is designed for each IoT device to optimize the local computing rate by considering its resource-constrained nature. During stage II, a Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO)-based online learning approach is proposed on the edge system to schedule communication bandwidth and optimize computational rate. Finally, extensive experiments demonstrate that our proposal outperforms the existing works from the perspective of QoE performance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".