MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410771506 · doi:10.1109/tmc.2025.3574065

Characterizing and Scheduling of Diffusion Process for Text-to-Image Generation in Edge Networks

2025· article· en· W4410771506 on OpenAlexaff
Shuangwei Gao, Peng Yang, Yuxin Kong, Feng Lyu, Ning Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdvanced Computing and Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Process (computing)Artificial intelligenceDistributed computingMathematical optimization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) technology is transforming content creation by enabling diverse customized and quality services. However, the limited computing resources on mobile devices hinder the provisioning of AIGC services at scale, pose challenges in guaranteeing user-satisfied content quality requirement. To address these challenges, we first investigate the characteristics of prompt category and inference models in Text-to-Image (T2I) diffusion process. It is observed that, model size, denoising steps, and computing resource, are three deciding factors to image generation utility. Based on this insight, we first design an edge-assisted AIGC service system to efficiently process multi-user T2I generative requests, employing a multi-flow queuing model to capture multi-user dynamics and characterize the impact of diffusion scheduling on service latency. The system schedules the diffusion process of T2I generation across edge-deployed models, balancing service quality and computing resource. To maximize generation utility under resource constraints, we propose a Monte Carlo Tree Search-based diffusion scheduling algorithm embedded with adaptive computing resource allocation subroutine. This algorithm ensures that, resource allocation dynamically adapts to scheduling decisions in real time, enabling an effective trade-off between service quality and latency. Extensive experimental comparison against baseline approaches demonstrates that, the proposed system can enhance the generation utility by up to 7.3$\%$, achieving a 2.9$\%$improvement in quality score and a 33.3$\%$reduction in service latency.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Mobile ComputingSame topicAdvanced Computing and AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207