PlumX Metrics
Embed PlumX Metrics

A Multi-Hop End-Edge Cooperative Computing Scheme for Power IoT

Electronics (Switzerland), ISSN: 2079-9292, Vol: 13, Issue: 13
2024
  • 1
    Citations
  • 0
    Usage
  • 0
    Captures
  • 2
    Mentions
  • 0
    Social Media
Metric Options:   Counts1 Year3 Year

Metrics Details

  • Citations
    1
  • Mentions
    2
    • Blog Mentions
      1
      • Blog
        1
    • News Mentions
      1
      • News
        1

Most Recent Blog

Electronics, Vol. 13, Pages 2595: A Multi-Hop End-Edge Cooperative Computing Scheme for Power IoT

Electronics, Vol. 13, Pages 2595: A Multi-Hop End-Edge Cooperative Computing Scheme for Power IoT Electronics doi: 10.3390/electronics13132595 Authors: Xue Li Xiaojuan Chen Guohua Li Xuguang

Most Recent News

Changchun University of Science and Technology Researcher Has Published New Study Findings on Electronics (A Multi-Hop End-Edge Cooperative Computing Scheme for Power IoT)

2024 JUL 22 (NewsRx) -- By a News Reporter-Staff News Editor at Electronics Daily -- Researchers detail new data in electronics. According to news reporting

Article Description

With the continuous development of the power Internet of Things (PIoT), smart devices (SDs) have been widely used in electric power inspections. Due to the limited resources of intelligent inspection SDs and the distance of overhead transmission lines, many inspection tasks cannot be processed promptly. This paper proposes a multi-hop-based end-edge cooperative computing (MHCC) scheme to address inspection task processing in power IoT. We formulate a multi-hop task offloading problem that minimizes the energy consumption of inspection SDs with delay constraints. We develop a JDPSO algorithm to solve the multi-hop task offloading problem and evaluate the algorithm’s performance based on numerous simulation experiments. The experimental results show that JDPSO reduces the system’s energy consumption by 56.30%, 48.56%, 78.87%, 50.89%, 30.85%, and 68.31%, and also reduces delay by 50.69%, 42.78%, 58.67%, 44.84%, 10.22%, and 62.88% compared to GA, RSA, SSA, MFO, DOA, and ALC schemes.

Bibliographic Details

Provide Feedback

Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know