MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400647435 · doi:10.1109/mcom.001.2300816

Unleashing the Potential of Stage-Wise Decision-Making in Scheduling of Graph-Structured Tasks Over Mobile Vehicular Clouds

2024· article· en· W4400647435 on OpenAlexaff
Minghui Liwang, Bingshuo Guo, Zhanxi Ma, Yuhan Su, Jian Jin, Seyyedali Hosseinalipour, Xianbin Wang, Huaiyu Dai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersBasic and Applied Basic Research Foundation of Guangdong ProvinceFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Science Foundation of Xiamen City
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)GraphMobile telephonyComputer networkTheoretical computer scienceMobile radio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To process high volumes of data across a fleet of dynamic and distributed vehicles, it is crucial to implement resource provisioning techniques that can provide reliable, cost-effective, and timely computing services. This article explores computation-intensive task scheduling over mobile vehicular clouds (MVCs). We use undirected weighted graphs (UWGs) to model both the execution of tasks and communication patterns among vehicles in an MVC. We then study reliable and timely scheduling of UWG tasks through a novel mechanism, operating on two complementary decision-making stages: Plan A and Plan B. Plan A entails a proactive decision-making approach, leveraging historical statistical data for the preemptive creation of an optimal mapping$(\alpha)$between tasks and the MVC prior to practical task scheduling. In contrast, Plan B explores a real-time decision-making paradigm, functioning as a reliable contingency plan. It seeks a viable mapping$(\beta)$if$\alpha$encounters failures during task scheduling due to the unpredictable nature of the network. Furthermore, we provide an in-depth exploration of the procedural intricacies and key contributing factors that underpin the success of our mechanism. Additionally, we present a case study showcasing our superior performance on time efficiency and computation overhead. We further discuss a series of open directions for future research.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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