4.7 Article

Optimal Mobile Computation Offloading with Hard Deadline Constraints

期刊

IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MOBILE COMPUTING
卷 19, 期 9, 页码 2160-2173

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/TMC.2019.2920819

关键词

Cloud computing; Task analysis; Wireless communication; Mobile handsets; Channel models; Performance evaluation; Heuristic algorithms; Cloud computing; mobile computation offloading; energy efficiency; mobile task execution performance; hard job deadline constraints

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper considers mobile computation offloading where task completion times are subject to hard deadline constraints. Hard deadlines are difficult to meet in conventional computation offloading due to the stochastic nature of the wireless channels involved. Rather than using binary offload decisions, we permit concurrent remote and local job execution when it is needed to ensure task completion deadlines. The paper addresses this problem for homogeneous Markovian wireless channel models. An online energy-optimal computation offloading algorithm, OnOpt, is proposed. Its energy optimality is shown by constructing a time-dilated absorbing Markov process and applying dynamic programming. Closed form results are derived for general Markovian processes, and the Gilbert-Elliott channel model is used to show how the particular structure of the Markov chain can be exploited in computing optimal offload initiation times more efficiently. It is shown that job completion time probabilities can be computed recursively, which leads to a significant reduction in the computational complexity of OnOpt. The performance of the proposed algorithm is compared to three others, namely, Immediate Offloading, Channel Threshold, and Local Execution. Performance results show that the proposed algorithm can significantly improve mobile device energy consumption compared to the other approaches while guaranteeing hard task execution deadlines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据