Dynamic Worker Availability Prediction at the Extreme Edge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leveraging the copious yet underutilized computational resources of end devices, also known as Extreme Edge Devices (EEDs), can significantly enhance the performance of various Internet of Things (IoT) applications. However, EEDs are heterogeneous and user-owned devices, which causes their availability to be highly unreliable. In this paper, we propose the Dynamic Worker Availability Prediction (DWAP) scheme. DWAP is the first scheme that predicts the availability of EEDs (i.e., workers) and adapts to the highly dynamic computing environment at the extreme edge. DWAP employs the Continuous-Time Markov Model (CTMC) to forecast the availability of workers in the upcoming time step. It does so while continuously fine-tuning the model parameters to incorporate newly available data. We use a dataset that consists of real-world Google cluster workload data traces. Extensive evaluations show that DWAP significantly outperforms a representative of state-of-the-art prediction schemes by up to 74% and 59% in terms of the Mean Absolute Error (MAE) and Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE), respectively. In addition, DWAP yields 97% and 48% reduction in task drop rate compared to prominent availability-unaware and availability-based resource allocation schemes, respectively.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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.
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".