MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Reliable and Efficient 5G Vehicular MEC: Guaranteed Task Completion with Minimal Latency

2025· article· en· W4414406066 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahsa Paknejad, Parisa Fard Moshiri, Murat Şimşek, Burak Kantarcı, Hussein T. Mouftah

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLatency (audio)Scheduling (production processes)ServerMobile edge computingComputationEdge computingParticle swarm optimizationTask analysisComputation offloadingBandwidth allocation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the advancement of Vehicular Edge Computing (VEC) as a tailored application of Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) for the automotive industry, addressing the rising demand for real-time processing in connected and autonomous vehicles. VEC brings computational resources closer to vehicles, reducing data processing delays crucial for safety-critical applications such as autonomous driving and intelligent traffic management. However, the challenge lies in managing the high and dynamic task load generated by vehicles’ data streams. We focus on enhancing task offloading and scheduling techniques to optimize computation latency in VEC networks. Our approach involves implementing task scheduling techniques, including First-Come, First-Served (FCFS), Shortest Deadline First (SDF), and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO). Additionally, we divide portions of tasks between the MEC servers and vehicles to reduce the number of dropped tasks and improve real-time adaptability. This paper also compares fixed and shared bandwidth scenarios to manage transmission efficiency under varying loads. Our findings indicate that MEC+Local (partitioning) scenario significantly outperforms MEC-only scenario by ensuring the completion of all tasks, resulting in a zero task drop ratio. The MEC-only scenario demonstrates approximately 5.65% better average end-to-end latency compared to the MEC+Local (partitioning) scenario when handling 200 tasks. However, this improvement comes at the cost of dropping a significant number of tasks (109 out of 200). Additionally, allocating shared bandwidth helps to slightly decrease transmission waiting time compared to using fixed bandwidth.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Body Area NetworksFrench-language works237,207