MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reliable Task Offloading in MEC through Transmission Diversity and Jamming-Aware Scheduling

2025· article· W4415933999 on OpenAlexaff
Ghazal Asemian, Mohammadreza Amini, Burak Kantarcı

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersScience and Engineering Research Council
KeywordsScheduling (production processes)Task analysisEnablingTask (project management)Dynamic priority schedulingTransmission (telecommunications)Key (lock)Mobile edge computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) is emerging as a key enabler for latency-sensitive applications by providing computational resources closer to end-users. However, the dynamic nature of task arrivals and the presence of communication threats such as jamming pose significant challenges for reliable task offloading and resource allocation. In this paper, we formulate a dynamic MEC framework considering the transmission diversity that jointly addresses task scheduling and resource block (RB) assignment in the presence of jamming. First, we define and evaluate key network metrics—including dropped task ratio and bandwidth utilization—while maintaining service continuity by accounting for the existing commitments of the edge server to previously offloaded tasks. Then, we propose a jamming-aware offloading and RB allocation framework that leverages transmission diversity and optimal scheduling across distributed gNBs. The proposed solution is compared to a similar scenario without transmission diversity and two baseline strategies of first-come-first-served (FCFS) and shortest task first (STF). The proposed algorithm effectively mitigates the impact of jamming while enhancing resource utilization and minimizing task drop rates, making it highly suitable for mission-critical MEC applications. At signal-to-jamming-and-noise ratio (SJNR) of 4 dB, the proposed method achieves a 0.26 task drop rate, outperforming the scenario without transmission diversity with a task drop rate of 0.50 and STF and FCFS strategies with 0.52 and 0.63 task drop rates, respectively.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207