Intelligent task scheduling in edge-cloud computing: A metaheuristic rule-based framework


Abstract

Edge computing offers significant advantages such as lower latency, higher bandwidth and energy savings by reducing dependency on remote data centres. However, to provide these advantages effectively, task scheduling strategies in edge computing environments need to be designed efficiently. Task scheduling is a challenging optimization problem classified as NP-Hard with solution time varying depending on the problem size. Metaheuristic methods are widely used in solving such complex problems and produce successful results. However, the iterative nature of these methods leads to delays in the solution process, and given the limited resources of edge computing environments, this makes problem-solving even more difficult. In this work, we suggest a rule-based approach that combines metaheuristic algorithms and machine learning techniques for the task scheduling problem. In the proposed method, different scenarios are generated and rules are extracted from these scenarios. In the scenario generation phase, Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO) and Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) algorithms are used and the most appropriate solutions are evaluated in the rule-based model. In the implementation phase, task scheduling is performed using the extracted rules. The primary benefit of the suggested approach is that it significantly reduces the time and energy costs that metaheuristic algorithms spend in the solution generation process. Experiment results indicate that the suggested approach is 25 times faster than PSO and 27 times faster than ACO. Moreover, in terms of task scheduling performance, the proposed method achieves a 17% better makespan than PSO and a 20% better makespan than ACO. Experiments considering different scenarios show that the proposed method provides high efficiency and effectiveness.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at peer.review@peerj.com.