4.7 Article

DREAM: Dynamic Resource and Task Allocation for Energy Minimization in Mobile Cloud Systems

期刊

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSAC.2015.2478718

关键词

Mobile cloud offloading policy; CPU/network speed scaling; resource and task allocation; energy minimization

资金

  1. Institute for Information and Communications Technology Promotion (IITP) - Korea government (MSIP) [B0190-15-2017]
  2. Ministry of Public Safety & Security (MPSS), Republic of Korea [B0190-15-2017] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To cope with increasing energy consumption in mobile devices, the mobile cloud offloading has received considerable attention from its ability to offload processing tasks of mobile devices to cloud servers, and previous studies have focused on single type tasks in fixed network environments. However, real network environments are spatio-temporally varying, and typical mobile devices have not only various types of tasks, e.g., network traffic, cloud offloadable/nonoffloadable workloads but also capabilities of CPU frequency scaling and network interface selection between WiFi and cellular. In this paper, we first jointly consider the following three dynamic problems in real mobile environments: 1) cloud offloading policy, i.e., determining to use local CPU resources or cloud resources; 2) allocation of tasks to transmit through networks and to process in local CPU; and 3) CPU clock speed and network interface controls. We propose a DREAM algorithm by invoking the Lyapunov optimization and mathematically prove that it minimizes CPU and network energy for given delay constraints. Trace-driven simulation based on real measurements demonstrates that DREAM can save over 35% of total energy than existing algorithms with the same delay. We also design DREAM architecture and demonstrate the applicability of DREAM in practice.

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