Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
Help about MediaWiki
Edge Computing Wiki
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Emerging Research Directions
(section)
Page
Discussion
British English
Read
Edit
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Software-Level Optimizations === Energy-aware software design is integral to achieving sustainability in edge computing. Wan et al. initiated the discussion on applying dynamic voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) within edge-based real-time systems [10]. Martinez et al. refined DVFS strategies by incorporating reinforcement learning methods that adaptively tune voltage and frequency according to workload fluctuations, illustrating substantial improvements in power efficiency [11]. On the task scheduling front, Li et al. proposed multi-objective algorithms to distribute computing workloads among heterogeneous IoT gateways, balancing performance, latency, and energy considerations [12]. Partial offloading techniques have also gained traction, particularly in AI inference. Zhang et al. presented a partitioning mechanism whereby only computationally heavy layers of a neural network are offloaded to specialized infrastructure, while simpler layers run on the edge device [13]. Hassan et al. and Moreno et al. examined lightweight containerization at the edge, demonstrating that resource overhead can be minimized through optimized container runtimes such as Docker, containerd, and CRI-O [14][15]. {| class="wikitable" style="width:100%; text-align:left;" |+ Representative System-Level and Policy-Focused Studies |- ! Study ! Contribution ! Findings ! Implications |- | [16] Chiang et al. | Proposed an edge–fog–cloud migration framework | Demonstrated dynamic workload relocation based on resource availability | Highlighted potential for reduced overall carbon footprint |- | [18] Qiu et al. | Developed sleep-mode protocols for 5G base stations | Showed drastic energy reduction during off-peak usage | Enabled significant cost savings and lowered emissions |- | [17] Yang et al. | Introduced carbon-intensity-aware scheduling | Aligned workload placement with regional grid data | Improved sustainability in multi-tier edge–fog–cloud environments |- | [22] White et al. | Proposed standardized carbon footprint metrics | Offered a uniform reporting structure for edge infrastructures | Facilitated consistent policy and regulatory compliance |- | [24] Johnson et al. | Analyzed economic incentives for green edge computing | Demonstrated effectiveness of tax benefits and carbon credits | Encouraged broader adoption of low-power deployments |}
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to Edge Computing Wiki may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see
Edge Computing Wiki:Copyrights
for details).
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)