Intelligent Task Allocation in Edge Computing for IoT Devices

undefined
I
N
-N
ETWORK
 D
ECISION
 M
AKING
I
NTELLIGENCE
 
FOR
 T
ASK
A
LLOCATION
 
IN
 E
DGE
 C
OMPUTING
Kostas Kolomvatsos, Christos Anagnostopoulos
30
th
 International Conference on Tools with
Artificial Intelligence
November 5-7, 2018
Volos, Greece
O
UTLINE
Introduction
Challenges
Tasks Allocation
Data Aware Mechanism
Experimental Evaluation
Conclusions and Future Work
I
NTRODUCTION
Internet of Things (IoT) offers a vast infrastructure of
devices
Intelligent analytics are offered on top of data collected
by IoT nodes, i.e., sensing and computing devices
Nodes can become knowledge producers through local
processing
I
NTRODUCTION
Legacy techniques involve data
processing at the Cloud
Cloud supports centralized
processing
Problem: Increased latency
Need for support time sensitive
applications
Solution: Edge Computing
It applies 
local processing 
at the
edge nodes
C
HALLENGES
Keep analytics processing 
close to nodes
We try to limit the latency in providing responses
Avoid 
data migration 
(increases the communication
overhead)
To provide analytics, nodes should execute a set of
tasks
T
ASKS
 A
LLOCATION
 
AT
 
THE
 E
DGE
Task management is used for
distributing tasks 
among Edge Devices
It should be done in an automated
manner
It is not necessary to explicitly define
the capabilities or location of edge
nodes
Data are distributed as they are
generated at different geographical
places
A
UTONOMOUS
 T
ASKS
 P
ROCESSING
We focus on the behavior/status
of each node (
nodes’ context
)
Nodes may act autonomously and
decide about the allocation of
tasks (
local execution or not
)
Our technique takes into
consideration:
Tasks characteristics
Nodes’ characteristics
The data present in every node
A
UTONOMOUS
 T
ASKS
 P
ROCESSING
Tasks may be delivered through streams
They have specific characteristics, e.g.,
size, complexity, deadline, priority,
software requirements
Nodes also exhibit specific
characteristics, e.g., 
load, throughput
Nodes ‘own’ a multidimensional dataset
We should decide on the local execution
of a task
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
We can support an adaptive scheme to be 
fully
aligned with nodes’ internal status, tasks
requirements and the collected data
Target:
Develop a relevant decision mechanism
Decisions should be taken in a distributed,
autonomous manner
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
Upon a task reception, nodes create the 
context
vector
Nodes load
Tasks priority
Available resources
 
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
The mechanism 
takes into consideration the data
present at the nodes
Nodes decide:
Local execution
Execution in the group
Execution at the Cloud
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
Nodes exchange contextual
information
Such information will affect the
decision making
Every node calculates an
information vector 
for every peer
Data statistical difference
The load
The communication cost
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
If a task will not be executed
locally, it will be sent to a peer
with:
Similar data
Low load
Low communication cost
If no peer is appropriate for
executing the task, then send it to
Cloud
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
The decision making:
Modeling
the contextual vectors (for tasks)
the information vectors (for peers)
Probabilistic local task allocation
Multi-criteria local task allocation
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
Probabilistic approach
We can adopt 
Bayesian inference
Two classes: 
Local execution (C1) or not (C2)
We build on a training dataset for classification
Based on 
context vector 
for a task the 
classifier
delivers the result
D
ATA
 A
WARE
 
MECHANISM
Multi-criteria decision making
We build an ordered list of
information vectors 
(data for peers)
We provide rankings for peers
Ratings are calculated based on the
information vectors
The candidate with the highest score
is selected to host the task
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
We assess
The 
correct selection of tasks 
that will be locally executed (Aspect A)
The 
correct identification of the appropriate peer 
when tasks is
offloaded (Aspect B)
The 
‘closeness’ of the result 
to the optimal solution (Aspect C)
Metrics
For Aspects A & B: 
Precision
 (P), 
Recall
 (R), 
F-Measure
 (F)
For Aspect C: We ‘create’ the 
ideal node 
and its information vector
[min_load, min_comm_cost, min_data_distance]
Closeness is represented by 
ω
i
, i.e., the Euclidean distance with the
ideal node
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
Datasets
Real dataset related to companies bankruptcy
*
Real dataset related to indoor environmental data
**
Training dataset
We create 300 context vectors and best actions
65% of vectors indicate local processing
35% of vectors indicate tasks offloading
We construct networking topology of 5,000 nodes
* https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/qualitative bankruptcy
** http://db.csail.mit.edu/labdata/labdata.html
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
In multi-criteria optimized tasks allocation, we focus
on the following scenarios (different weights for each
criterion)
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
Results for Precision, Recall and F-Measure
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
Closeness with the ideal node
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
Closeness for load
E
XPERIMENTAL
 E
VALUATION
Closeness for data
C
ONCLUSIONS
 
AND
 F
UTURE
 W
ORK
Our sequential decision making
manages to select the appropriate
action for each task
We manage to get efficient
decisions related to the local
processing
We can select the best possible
peer when tasks are offloaded
Time-optimized decisions 
could
increase the efficiency
Thank You!!
Questions?
Slide Note
Embed
Share

"This study explores the utilization of in-network decision-making intelligence for task allocation in edge computing, focusing on challenges like latency and data migration. Techniques such as tasks allocation at the edge and autonomous tasks processing are discussed. The aim is to enable efficient data processing and analytics close to IoT nodes through autonomous decision-making by edge devices."

  • Edge Computing
  • IoT Devices
  • Task Allocation
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Data Processing.

Uploaded on Sep 24, 2024 | 0 Views


Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. IN-NETWORK DECISION MAKING INTELLIGENCE FOR TASK ALLOCATION IN EDGE COMPUTING Kostas Kolomvatsos, Christos Anagnostopoulos 30thInternational Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence November 5-7, 2018 Volos, Greece

  2. OUTLINE Introduction Challenges Tasks Allocation Data Aware Mechanism Experimental Evaluation Conclusions and Future Work

  3. INTRODUCTION Internet of Things (IoT) offers a vast infrastructure of devices Intelligent analytics are offered on top of data collected by IoT nodes, i.e., sensing and computing devices Nodes can become knowledge producers through local processing

  4. INTRODUCTION Legacy techniques involve data processing at the Cloud Cloud supports centralized processing Problem: Increased latency Need for support time sensitive applications Solution: Edge Computing It applies local processing at the edge nodes

  5. CHALLENGES Keep analytics processing close to nodes We try to limit the latency in providing responses Avoid data migration (increases the communication overhead) To provide analytics, nodes should execute a set of tasks

  6. TASKS ALLOCATION AT THE EDGE Task management is used for distributing tasks among Edge Devices It should be done in an automated manner It is not necessary to explicitly define the capabilities or location of edge nodes Data are distributed as they are generated at different geographical places

  7. AUTONOMOUS TASKS PROCESSING We focus on the behavior/status of each node (nodes context) Nodes may act autonomously and decide about the allocation of tasks (local execution or not) Our technique takes into consideration: Tasks characteristics Nodes characteristics The data present in every node

  8. AUTONOMOUS TASKS PROCESSING Tasks may be delivered through streams They have specific characteristics, e.g., size, complexity, deadline, priority, software requirements Nodes also exhibit specific characteristics, e.g., load, throughput Nodes own a multidimensional dataset We should decide on the local execution of a task

  9. DATA AWARE MECHANISM We can support an adaptive scheme to be fully aligned with nodes internal status, tasks requirements and the collected data Target: Develop a relevant decision mechanism Decisions autonomous manner should be taken in a distributed,

  10. DATA AWARE MECHANISM Upon a task reception, nodes create the context vector Nodes load Tasks priority Available resources

  11. DATA AWARE MECHANISM The mechanism takes into consideration the data present at the nodes Nodes decide: Local execution Execution in the group Execution at the Cloud

  12. DATA AWARE MECHANISM Nodes exchange contextual information Such information will affect the decision making Every node calculates an information vector for every peer Data statistical difference The load The communication cost

  13. DATA AWARE MECHANISM If a task will not be executed locally, it will be sent to a peer with: Similar data Low load Low communication cost If no peer is appropriate for executing the task, then send it to Cloud

  14. DATA AWARE MECHANISM The decision making: Modeling the contextual vectors (for tasks) the information vectors (for peers) Probabilistic local task allocation Multi-criteria local task allocation

  15. DATA AWARE MECHANISM Probabilistic approach We can adopt Bayesian inference Two classes: Local execution (C1) or not (C2) We build on a training dataset for classification Based on context vector for a task the classifier delivers the result

  16. DATA AWARE MECHANISM Multi-criteria decision making We build an ordered list of information vectors (data for peers) We provide rankings for peers Ratings are calculated based on the information vectors The candidate with the highest score is selected to host the task

  17. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION We assess The correct selection of tasks that will be locally executed (Aspect A) The correct identification of the appropriate peer when tasks is offloaded (Aspect B) The closeness of the result to the optimal solution (Aspect C) Metrics For Aspects A & B: Precision (P), Recall (R), F-Measure (F) For Aspect C: We create the ideal node and its information vector [min_load, min_comm_cost, min_data_distance] Closeness is represented by i, i.e., the Euclidean distance with the ideal node

  18. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION Datasets Real dataset related to companies bankruptcy* Real dataset related to indoor environmental data** Training dataset We create 300 context vectors and best actions 65% of vectors indicate local processing 35% of vectors indicate tasks offloading We construct networking topology of 5,000 nodes * https://archive.ics.uci.edu/ml/datasets/qualitative bankruptcy ** http://db.csail.mit.edu/labdata/labdata.html

  19. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION In multi-criteria optimized tasks allocation, we focus on the following scenarios (different weights for each criterion)

  20. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION Results for Precision, Recall and F-Measure

  21. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION Closeness with the ideal node

  22. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION Closeness for load

  23. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION Closeness for data

  24. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK Our sequential decision making manages to select the appropriate action for each task We manage to get efficient decisions related to the local processing We can select the best possible peer when tasks are offloaded Time-optimized decisions could increase the efficiency

  25. Thank You!! Questions?

Related


More Related Content

giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#giItT1WQy@!-/#