Agile Reinforcement Learning for Real-Time Task Scheduling in Edge Computing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soft real-time applications are becoming increasingly complex, posing significant challenges for scheduling offloaded tasks in edge computing environments while meeting task timing constraints. Moreover, the exponential growth of the search space, presence of multiple objectives and parameters, and highly dynamic nature of edge computing environments further exacerbate the complexity of task scheduling. As a result, schedulers based on heuristic and metaheuristic algorithms frequently encounter difficulties in generating optimal or near-optimal task schedules due to their constrained ability to adapt to the dynamic conditions and complex environmental characteristics of edge computing. Accordingly, reinforcement learning algorithms have been incorporated into schedulers to address the complexity and dynamic conditions inherent in task scheduling in edge computing. However, a significant limitation of reinforcement learning algorithms is the prolonged learning time required to adapt to new environments and to address medium- and large-scale problems. This challenge arises from the extensive global action space and frequent random exploration of irrelevant actions. Therefore, this study proposes Agile Reinforcement learning (aRL), in which the RL-agent performs informed exploration and executes only relevant actions. Consequently, the predictability of the RL-agent is enhanced, leading to rapid adaptation and convergence, which positions aRL as a suitable candidate for scheduling the tasks of soft real-time applications in edge computing. The experiments demonstrate that the combination of informed exploration and action-masking methods enables aRL to achieve a higher hit-ratio and converge faster than the baseline approaches.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".