4.8 Article

Mobile-Edge-Computing-Based Hierarchical Machine Learning Tasks Distribution for IIoT

Journal

IEEE INTERNET OF THINGS JOURNAL
Volume 7, Issue 3, Pages 2169-2180

Publisher

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JIOT.2019.2959035

Keywords

Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT); machine learning (ML); mobile edge computing (MEC)

Funding

  1. U.S. Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering [FA8750-15-2-0119]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this article, we propose a novel framework of mobile edge computing (MEC)-based hierarchical machine learning (ML) tasks distribution for the Industrial Internet of Things. It is assumed that a batch of ML tasks, such as anomaly detection, need to be executed timely in an MEC setting, where the devices have limited computing capability while the MEC server (MES) has rich computing resources. Thus, a small ML model for the device and a deep ML model for the MES are pretrained offline using historical data, and then they are deployed accordingly. However, offloading tasks to the MES introduces communications delay. Thus, each device must decide the portion of the tasks to offload to minimize the processing delay. Since the delay and the error of data processing are incurred by communications and ML computing, a joint optimization problem is formulated to minimize the total delay subject to the ML model complexity and inference error rate, data quality, computing capability at the device and MES, and communications bandwidth. A closed-form solution is derived analytically and an optimal offloading strategy selection algorithm is proposed. Insights are provided to understand the tradeoff between communications and ML computing in offloading decisions, and the effects of key parameters in the proposed algorithm are investigated. The numerical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available