MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joint Model Assignment and Resource Allocation for Cost-Effective Mobile Generative Services

2024· article· en· W4408325404 on OpenAlexaff
Shuangwei Gao, Peng Yang, Yuxin Kong, Feng Lyu, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTransportation and Mobility Innovations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceResource allocationJoint (building)Resource management (computing)Mobile telephonyResource (disambiguation)Distributed computingComputer networkMobile radioEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Intelligence Generated Content (AIGC) services can efficiently satisfy user-specified content creation demands, but the high computational requirements pose various challenges to supporting mobile users at scale. In this paper, we present our design of an edge-enabled AIGC service provisioning system to properly assign computing tasks of generative models to edge servers, thereby improving overall user experience and reducing content generation latency. Specifically, once the edge server receives user requested task prompts, it dynamically assigns appropriate models and allocates computing resources based on features of each category of prompts. The generated contents are then delivered to users. The key to this system is a proposed probabilistic model assignment approach, which estimates the quality score of generated contents for each prompt based on category labels. Next, we introduce a heuristic algorithm that enables adaptive configuration of both generation steps and resource allocation, according to the various task requests received by each generative model on the edge. Simulation results demonstrate that the designed system can effectively enhance the quality of generated content by up to 4.7% while reducing response delay by up to 39.1% compared to 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.241 · 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
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransportation and Mobility InnovationsFrench-language works237,207