MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptive Offloading and Enhancement for Low-Light Video Analytics on Mobile Devices

2024· article· en· W4408324260 on OpenAlexaff
Yuanyi He, Peng Yang, Tian Qin, Jiawei Hou, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAnalyticsMobile deviceData scienceOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we explore adaptive offloading and enhancement strategies for video analytics tasks on computing-constrained mobile devices in low-light conditions. We observe that the accuracy of low-light video analytics varies from different enhancement algorithms. The root cause could be the disparities in the effectiveness of enhancement algorithms for feature extraction in analytic models. Specifically, the difference in class activation maps (CAMs) between enhanced and low-light frames demonstrates a positive correlation with video analytics accuracy. Motivated by such observations, a novel enhancement quality assessment method is proposed on CAMs to evaluate the effectiveness of different enhancement algorithms for low-light videos. Then, we design a multi-edge system, which adaptively offloads and enhances low-light video analytics tasks from mobile devices. To achieve the trade-off between the enhancement quality and the latency for all system-served mobile devices, we propose a genetic-based scheduling algorithm, which can find a near-optimal solution in a reasonable time to meet the latency requirement. Thereby, the offloading strategies and the enhancement algorithms are properly selected under the condition of limited end-edge bandwidth and edge computation resources. Simulation experiments demonstrate the superiority of the proposed system, improving accuracy up to 20.83% compared to existing benchmarks.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicImage and Video Quality AssessmentFrench-language works237,207