MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Edge Selection Non-Cooperative Game in IoT Edge Computing

2024· article· en· W4405974431 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge computingSelection (genetic algorithm)Internet of ThingsHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Computational offloading is a pivotal solution to several Internet of Things (IoT) issues as it helps subdue the constrained nature of IoT devices. By harnessing the large capacity at the Edge, IoT devices with limited battery and storage can delegate certain tasks, especially those related to Machine Learning. Because of their restricted capacity, such devices can only store a limited amount of data as a training set for their learning, leading to a faulty prediction with high error rate. To tackle that issue, IoT devices can federate the learning process with other devices while the Edge server acts as an aggregator. However, selecting the appropriate Edge is a significant challenge. In fact, although learning collectively can reduce the prediction error, it also brings about a communication cost that depends on the selected Edge. Thus, in this paper, we propose a Non-Cooperative game where devices autonomously and efficiently select an Edge server in order to reduce both their learning error and communication cost.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Bandit Algorithms ResearchFrench-language works237,207