×

A gravitational task model with arbitrary anchor points for target sensitive real-time applications. (English) Zbl 1185.93012

Summary: Classic task models for real-time systems focus on execution windows expressing earliest start times and deadlines of tasks for feasibility. Only within these windows the execution of tasks is feasible, and it is considered of uniform utility.
Some tasks, however, have target demands in addition: a task should preferably execute at a specific target point within its execution window, but can execute around this point, albeit at lower utility. Examples of such applications include control and media processing.
In this paper, we present a task model based on a gravitational analogy to address these issues. Tasks are considered as massive bobs hanging on a pendulum: a single task, left to itself, will execute at the bottom, the target point. If a force, such as the weight of other tasks, is applied, it can be shifted around this point. Thus, tasks’ importance and their utility around target points can be expressed. Since the execution of a task cannot be mapped to a point in time, the model allows tasks to express an arbitrary point with its execution to represent the whole execution. This point is called the anchor point.
Moreover, we show an example of a scheduling algorithm for this model which finds an approximation to the best compromise of tasks’ interests based on the equilibrium state of a pendulum. Nonetheless, this task model is not restricted to a particular scheduling algorithm.
Results from a simulation study show the effectiveness of the approach.

MSC:

93A30 Mathematical modelling of systems (MSC2010)
68M20 Performance evaluation, queueing, and scheduling in the context of computer systems
70Q05 Control of mechanical systems
90B35 Deterministic scheduling theory in operations research
93C95 Application models in control theory
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Baruah S, Buttazzo G, Gorinsky S, Lipari G (1999) Scheduling periodic task systems to minimize output jitter. In: RTCSA ’99: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on real-time computing systems and applications, Washington, DC, USA, 1999. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, p 62
[2] Bülbül K, Kaminsky P, Yano C (2007) Preemption in single machine earliness/tardiness scheduling. J Sched 10(4–5):271–292 · Zbl 1168.90427 · doi:10.1007/s10951-007-0028-6
[3] Buttazzo GC (2004) Hard real-time computing systems: Predictable scheduling algorithms and applications (real-time systems series). Springer TELOS, Santa Clara
[4] Buttazzo GC, Lipari G, Caccamo M, Abeni L (2002) Elastic scheduling for flexible workload management. IEEE Trans Comput 51(3):289–302 · doi:10.1109/12.990127
[5] Chen K, Muhlethaler P (1996) A scheduling algorithm for tasks described by time value function. Real-Time Syst 10(3):293–312 · doi:10.1007/BF00383389
[6] Guerra R, Fohler G (2008) A gravitational task model for target sensitive real-time applications. In: ECRTS08–20th euromicro conference on real-time systems, Prague, Czech Republic, July 2008 · Zbl 1185.93012
[7] Isovic D, Fohler G, Steffens LFM (2003) Timing constraints of MPEG-2 decoding for high quality video: misconceptions and realistic assumptions. In: 15th euromicro conference on real-time systems (ECRTS 03), Porto, Portugal, July 2003
[8] Jensen ED (1992) Asynchronous decentralized real-time computer systems. In: Halang WA, Stoyenko AD (eds) Real-time computing, the NATO Advanced Study Institute. Springer, Berlin
[9] Li P (2006) A utility accrual scheduling algorithm for real-time activities with mutual exclusion resource constraints. IEEE Trans Comput 55(4):454–469 · doi:10.1109/TC.2006.47
[10] Li P, Ravindran B, Jensen ED (2004) Adaptive time-critical resource management using time/utility functions: Past, present, and future. In: COMPSAC ’04: Proceedings of the 28th annual international computer software and applications conference–workshops and fast abstracts (COMPSAC’04), Washington, DC, USA, 2004. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, pp 12–13
[11] Locke CD (1986) Best-effort decision-making for real-time scheduling. PhD thesis, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
[12] Marti P, Fohler G, Ramamritham K, Fuertes JM (2001) Jitter compensation in real-time control systems. In: Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE real-time systems symposium, London, UK, Dec 2001
[13] Prasad D, Burns A, Atkins M (2003) The valid use of utility in adaptive real-time systems. Real-Time Syst 25(2–3):277–296 · Zbl 1081.68007 · doi:10.1023/A:1025184411567
[14] Sun W, Yuan Y-X (2006) Optimization theory and methods, vol 1. Springer, Berlin
[15] Wang J, Ravindran B (2004) Time-utility function-driven switched Ethernet: Packet scheduling algorithm, implementation, and feasibility analysis. IEEE Trans Parallel Distrib Syst 15(2):119–133 · doi:10.1109/TPDS.2004.1264796
[16] Wu H, Balli U, Ravindran B, Jensen ED (2005) Utility accrual real-time scheduling under variable cost functions. In: RTCSA ’05: Proceedings of the 11th IEEE international conference on embedded and real-time computing systems and applications (RTCSA’05), Washington, DC, USA, 2005. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, pp 213–219 · Zbl 1390.68111
[17] Wu H, Ravindran B, Jensen ED, Li P (2006) Energy-efficient, utility accrual scheduling under resource constraints for mobile embedded systems. Trans Embed Comput Sys 5(3):513–542 · doi:10.1145/1165780.1165781
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.