Joint Model Assignment and Resource Allocation for Cost-Effective Mobile Generative Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".