A Combinatorial Optimization for Energy-efficient
Mobile Cloud Offloading over Cellular Networks
Kaiyang Liu, Jun Peng*, Xiaoyong Zhang and Zhiwu Huang
School of Information Science and Engineering, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China 400075
Email: {liukaiyang, pengj*, zhangxy, hzw}@csu.edu.cn
AbstractRecently, mobile cloud offloading is a promising
technique to deal with the increasingly complex applications on
mobile devices, meeting the ever-increasing energy requirements.
However, cloud offloading with multiple mobile devices may cause
considerable mutual interference, which may result in intolerable
time delay and more energy consumption. In this paper, a novel
offloading decision method is investigated to minimize the total
energy consumption of mobile devices over cellular networks.
Generally, mobile devices can execute a sequence of tasks in par-
allel with different characteristics, i.e., communication-intensive
and computation-intensive. And recent advances show that only
computation-intensive tasks are applicable to be offloaded for
energy saving. The offloading decision issue is formulated as
a NP-hard combinatorial optimization problem with the time
deadline and communication quality constraints. Combining the
problem linearization method and decision variables mapping
from integer to the real domain, a rapid and efficient iterative
approximation method is proposed, helping the cloud controller
to select the best tasks for offloading aiming at minimizing the
total energy consumption. Numerical simulation demonstrates
that considerable energy can be saved with the proposed task
offloading method in mobile cloud scenarios.
Index Termsmobile cloud computing; task offloading; cellu-
lar networks; energy efficiency
I. I NTRODUCTION
Nowadays, we are witnessing an explosive growth in mo-
bile devices development. According to the report of the
Cisco Visual Networking Index, there will be 11.6 billion
mobile-connected devices on earth by the end of 2020 [1].
Moreover, numerous mobile applications and services have
been emerging, making the life of people much easier. Now
mobile devices are comparable to the computing power of
desktop computers, and they can communicate over high speed
4G/WiFi networks. Thus mobile services may not be limited
by the computation or communication capacity. Nevertheless,
mobile devices still have an inherent problem, i.e., limited
battery life [2]. In recent years, mobile cloud computing tech-
nology has been envisioned as a promising and challenging
technology to overcome this limitation.
As a newly emerging computing paradigm, mobile cloud
computing brings a new idea to augment the capabilities of
mobile devices by delegating computing tasks to the cloud [3].
Nowadays, various mobile cloud platforms have been deployed
for energy hungry applications. In all emerged mobile cloud
schemes, cloud offloading mechanism is treated as one of
the most powerful and indispensable techniques which can
potentially save energy for mobile users [4]. But now research
978-1-5090-1328-9/16/$31.00 2016 IEEE
efforts for offloading mechanism are still limited and have
defects that cannot be ignored. And the foremost challenge is
that cloud offloading with multiple mobile devices may cause
considerable mutual communication interference [5]. With mo-
bile devices competing for limited spectrum resources, cloud
offloading may cause the reduction of wireless communication
quality. Moreover, it is worth noting that the inferior wireless
communication quality may potentially increase the running
latency of the cloud offloading process [6]. Previous research
has shown that the existing cloud offloading systems, such as
Gaikai, can cause communication time-delays up to 400ms
[7]. The longer running latency and worse wireless commu-
nication quality may result in more energy consumption of
mobile devices. In conclusion, if too many mobile devices are
offloading tasks onto the cloud, cloud offloading may lose the
advantage of energy conservation for mobile devices.
Hence, several important issues arise: Can all limitations
above be overcome to optimize the energy efficiency of
multiple mobile devices? Can mobile devices obtain cloud of-
floading service with less time latency and acceptable wireless
communication quality? Generally, task offloading mechanism
is leveraged to ease this issue. In fact, most currently available
mobile devices support multitasking. Thus mobile device may
process parallel tasks simultaneously [8]. And recent advances
in cloud offloading show that not all mobile applications are
applicable to be offloaded due to task characteristics, i.e.,
communication-intensive and computation-intensive [9]. The
computational workload densities of computation-intensive
tasks are relatively higher comparing with communication-
intensive tasks. If more computation-intensive applications,
e.g., mobile augmented reality, automatic target recognition
and 3D video games, are offloaded, more energy can be
saved with cloud offloading service. Thus, to optimize the
energy efficiency of mobile devices, a novel task offloading
decision method is investigated that enables the offloading
of computation intensive tasks in this paper. And the major
contributions of this paper can be summarized as follows:
With the widespread deployment of cellular base stations,
the cellular networks can provide ubiquitous mobile cloud
services. To optimize the energy efficiency of mobile
devices, the task offloading decision of the mobile device
over cellular networks is formulated as a constrained 01
nonlinear integer programming problem, under the time
delay and transmission error rate constraints.
 Due to its NP-hard complexity, we simplify this optimiza-
tion problem through linearization and decision variables
mapping from integer to the real domain, transforming it
to a standard linear programming problem. This issue can
be solved efficiently using polynomial-time algorithms to
determine the priorities of tasks for offloading.
By taking the worst case as the initial state, an iterative
decoupling algorithm is proposed to approximate the
optimal offloading decisions with high efficiency for
each mobile device. The proposed iterative algorithm can
solve the NP-hard problem at a considerably lower cost,
revealing near-optimal offloading decisions to minimize
the energy consumption of mobile devices. The compu-
tation process is completed by the powerful cloud side,
providing task offloading guidance for energy saving.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Section II
provides the related work. Section III presents the system
overview, depicts the mobile cloud computing architecture,
and introduces the wireless fading channel over cellular net-
works, and power consumption with time delay models. Then
Section IV provides the problem formulation for task offload-
ing process. And Section V illustrates efficient algorithms
in solving the task offloading decision problem. Section VI
presents numerical simulations in the mobile cloud scenarios.
At last, Section VII draws the conclusion.
II. R ELATED W ORK
Now cloud offloading techniques have been considered as
promising and powerful techniques to augment the capabilities
of mobile devices and improve user experience. These works
mainly focus on two aspects: (i) minimizing the energy con-
sumption of mobile devices [4][10][11], and (ii) minimizing
the application execution delay [5][12].
As prospective research works, Kumar et al. [4] provided
a trade-off analysis between the energy consumption of a
mobile device and the energy consumed by sending the input
data to the cloud. However, the assumption in it may not
meet the reality that simply let a single value reflect the
computing capacity for each application has its own compu-
tational requirements. MAUI [10] allowed code offloading to
a resource rich computing infrastructure for energy efficiency.
Zhang et al. [11] investigated a threshold offloading method
to decide whether an entire application should be offloaded or
locally executed on a mobile device, aiming at the reduction of
the mobile devices energy consumption. However, this work
only considers single-device offloading, ignoring the mutual
interference caused by multiple mobile devices.
More recently, considering the overhead of cloud offloading
in terms of both processing time and energy, Chen et al. [5]
proposed a game-theoretic approach to solve the decentralized
offloading decision making problem among multiple mobile
devices. To save the energy of mobile devices and meet the
requirement of application execution time, Huang et al. [12]
proposed an effective dynamic offloading algorithm based
on Lyapunov optimization, which provides a near-optimal
solution with low complexity.
Fig. 1. Mobile cloud computing architecture.
Inspired by previous work and considering the mutual
interference caused by multiple devices, in this paper, we
investigate the task offloading decision problem to minimize
the energy consumption with a time delay constraint and
acceptable communication quality. The offloading priorities of
all tasks are derived so that more computation-intensive but not
communication-intensive tasks are offloaded to the cloud side.
III. S YSTEM OVERVIEW
A. Mobile Cloud Computing Environments
As illustrated in Fig. 1, the system architecture of mobile
cloud service is depicted, which consists of following three key
components: a mobile cloud provider, a wireless base station,
and a set of N mobile devices. The cloud provider has a
cloud controller module and several resource rich servers, such
as application servers and data servers. The cloud controller
monitors the requests from mobile devices, and manages
resources from servers to provide corresponding cloud services
through the wireless base-station.
To offer rapid application and storage services, the cloud
controller, servers and wireless access points are linked with
high-speed wired networks. In contrast, cloud users and wire-
less base-station are able to communicate with each other over
the cellular network. Like previous study in mobile cloud
computing [5], we assume the distance between the mobile
device and the wireless access point remains the same in one
offloading period (e.g., a few seconds).
It can be assumed that each mobile device is concurrently
processing Mi parallel tasks, i=1, 2, ..., N . The computing
workload of task j on mobile device i is i,j , j=1, 2, ..., Mi .
Let the binary variable i,j {0, 1} be the offloading flag of
tasks. And i,j = 1 donates that the task j is executed on
the mobile device i, while i,j = 0 donates that the task j is
offloaded onto the cloud side. Similarly, let i {0, 1} be the
service flag of mobile devices i. If all tasks is executed locally,
we set i = 0. Otherwise if at least one task is offloaded to
the cloud, we set i = 1. And i can be derived from
Mi
Y
i = 1 i,j . (1)
j=1
 If the offloading is necessary, the mobile device will send a
request to the cloud controller through wireless connections.
The cloud controller contacts the application server, data
server and wireless base-station to prepare the computing,
storage and radio resources. When all available resources
are ready, each mobile device implements the proposed task
offloading policy to select and offload appropriate tasks, while
all remaining tasks are executed locally on mobile devices. The
input data size for communication is donated as i,j . When
the computing on the cloud side is done, the mobile device
receives the output data back from the application server.
B. Wireless Fading Channel over Cellular Networks
Cloud computing is a model for enabling ubiquitous and
convenient service. With the widespread deployment of cel-
lular base stations, the cellular networks can provide cloud
users with prevalent access services. To provide ubiquitous
mobile cloud services, we assume that the mobile device can
access cloud service over cellular networks. Considering the
mutual interference caused by other mobile devices and the
background interference, the signal to interference plus noise
ratio (SINR) in the channel i can be derived from [5]
Pis Hi
i = PN . (2)
2 + s
r=1,r6=i r Pr Hr
Here, Pis represents the data transmission power, 2 denotes
the background noise power. And Hi = da denotes the
i Cic
channel gain, where di is the distance between mobile device
i and the wireless access point. And a is the path loss factor.
As can be seen in formula (2), an increase in the number of
mobile devices produces additional interference. But this effect
can be suppressed by signal processing and channel coding
techniques to produce a positive coding gain [13]. With the
0
coding gain G[dB], the improved SINR i is indicated by
0 G
i = i 10 . 10 (3)
Then, according to the Shannon capacity, the channel ca-
pacity of mobile device i can be derived as follows:
0
Ri = W log2 (1 + i ), (4)
where W denotes the bandwidth. Moreover, the theoretical
analysis in [14] indicates that the number of transmission
errors is related to the SINR in a digital baseband. The bit
error rate (BER) i can be expressed as follows:
q
i = Q( 2i0 ), (5)
where Q(x) is used for computing the probability of error in
communication systems. Normalized to a zero mean and a unit
variance, Q(x) can be defined as follows:
Z
1 2
Q(x) = et /2
dt. (6)
2
x previous study in [4][5][12].
C. Energy Consumption and Time Delay Models
The task execution process involves four independent en-
ergy consumption and time delay models. And they are
introduced respectively as below:
Task Execution on Mobile Devices: With the dynamic
voltage and frequency scaling (DVFS) ability, modern CPU of
mobile devices can adjust its computing capacity for different
applications [15]. Let Ci,j m
be the computing capacity and
power consumption of task j on mobile device i. If task j
is executed locally, its task execution time tm
i,j is
i,j
tm
i,j = m . (7)
Ci,j
The classic CPU energy consumption of the mobile device
em
i,j can be derived from [16]
em m i
i,j = (i (Ci,j ) + i )tm
i,j , (8)
where the exponent i ranges from 2 to 3, and i and i are
parameters determined by the processing model.
Task Execution on Cloud Server: If task j is offloaded on
to the cloud, the computing capacity assigned from the cloud
is Cic . And it is assumed to be more powerful than that of the
mobile device. Therefore, the task execution time on cloud
side tci,j is given by
i,j
tci,j = . (9)
As the mobile device is in standby mode with power
consumption Pic , its standby energy consumption eci,j is given
by
eci,j = tci,j Pic . (10)
Input Data Sending: If task j with data size i,j is offload-
ed through the cellular network, the input data transmission
time tsi,j is derived from
i,j
tsi,j = . (11)
Ri
Let Pis be the data transmission power consumption. In fact,
the data transmission over the cellular network consumes the
tail energy after transferring data for a few seconds [17]. Let
Pi be the cellular tail power consumption of mobile device
i. Let ti be its tail time. The energy consumption of the data
transmission esi,j can be expressed by
esi,j = tsi,j Pis + Pi ti . (12)
Output Data Receiving: In many mobile applications, e.g.,
virus scanning and face recognition, the size of output data is
much smaller than that of input data in general. So we choose
to ignore the output data receiving process for all mobile
devices, including the time delay and energy consumption
of data receiving. We make this hypothesis just similar to
 IV. P ROBLEM F ORMULATION FOR TASK O FFLOADING
In this section, we formulate the energy consumption of
the task offloading process for each mobile device as a 01
nonlinear integer programming problem. For mobile device i,
its energy consumption can be divided into two categories:
(i) the energy consumed by task execution when the task is
executed on the mobile device, and (ii) the input data sending
and the standby energy consumption when the task is offloaded
onto the cloud server. So the total energy consumption i of
the mobile device is given by
Mi Mi
X X
i = i,j em
i,j + (1 i,j )(eci,j
j=1 j=1
Then the execution deadline and the transmission error rate
constraints are considered to ensure the timeliness and the
wireless transmission quality of the mobile cloud service.
Execution Deadline Constraints: As mentioned earlier,
cloud offloading may cause considerable time delays. We set
Tic as the task transmission and execution time with the cloud
service, which should be less than the time deadline Tid .
Mi
X ln(1 i )
Tic = (1 i,j )(tsi,j + tci,j ) Tid
j=1
Transmission Error Rate Constraints: As the transmis-
sion contains a number of parallel tasks, the error rate of
the complete data sending process should meet the error rate
constraints i :
Mi
Y case SINR as the initial input by setting all i,j = 0, i.e., all
i = 1 (1 (1 i,j )i ) i .
j=1
To minimize the total energy consumption of mobile de-
vices, the constrained optimization problem is as follows:
N
X X Mi
N X
min i = i,j em c s
i,j + (1 i,j )(ei,j + ei,j ) (16)
i,j
i=1 i=1 j=1
s.t.(for all i) : (a)Constraints in (14) (15),
(b)i,j {0, 1}.
This is a 01 nonlinear integer programming problem.
The non-linearity of the objective function and the constraint
conditions make this problem difficult to solve. In this case,
we can enumerate all possible {i,j }, choosing the set that
has the minimal energy consumption. Although determining
its solution space is not difficult as in the case of a continuous
optimization problem, this brute-force search will lead to the
complexity of (2N Mi ). Therefore, we can infer that this
constrained 01 nonlinear integer programming problem has
the NP-hard characteristic [18].
V. S OLUTION FOR TASK O FFLOADING D ECISION
In this section, we show that efficient solutions to this
NP-hard optimization problem exist. The solution combines
the problem linearization and 01 decision variables mapping
from integer to the real domain, revealing close-to-optimal
offloading decisions.
As mentioned before, the non-linearity of constraint i i
makes this optimization problem difficult to solve. By analyz-
ing its characteristic, the constraint can be changed to linear
format. To begin with, by taking logarithm to the both sides
of i i , the constraint can be converted as follows:
Mi
X
+ esi,j ). (13) ln(1 i ) ln(1 (1 i,j )i ). (18)
j=1
As {i,j } are 01 variables, the constraint (18) can be
further transformed as follows:
Mi
X
i,j Di , (19)
j=1
where the lower bound of local execution Di is given by:
 
ln(1 i )
Di := Mi . (20)
(14)
Then we replace constraint (15) with equivalent constraint
(19), and relax the discrete integer variables i,j {0, 1} to
continuous parameters in a real domain, i.e., 0 i,j 1.
Moreover, it is worth noting that the BER i and the time delay
of the data transmission ti,j
s are i,j related functions. Namely,
the quality of wireless service depends on the number of
mobile device with cloud service. Thus, we consider the worst-
(15) i = 1, and then the original value of Di and ti,j
s are obtained.
Thus the optimization problem can be transferred to a linear
programming formation, which can be solved efficiently using
the IBM ILOG CPLEX [19].
The obtained continuous variable 0 i,j 1 represents
the offloading priority of task j on mobile device i. The
smaller the parameter i,j , the higher the priority of task j is
for offloading on mobile device i. Then for all mobile devices,
we sort {i,j } in ascending order. And early tasks in the
queue with higher priorities are selected for offloading until
constraints (14) and (19) are satisfied. We reset these early
(17) {i,j } as 0, and reset the others as 1. As mentioned above,
we take the worst-case SINR as the initial input. So for close-
to-optimal offloading decisions, the iterative approximation
algorithm is proposed for decoupling as follows.
As can be seen in Algorithm 1, we recalculate the offloading
decision i,j for mobile device i in each iteration. And the
binary variable service flag i can also be updated as Eq. (1).
We repeat the process until i remain the same in the iteration,
revealing the close-to-optimal offloading decisions at last.
Complexity Analysis: For linear programming solving,
the running time of CPLEX is polynomial, i.e., it takes
up to (N Mi )2 iterations for an accurate result. And the
Algorithm 1 The Iterative Approximation Algorithm TABLE I ENERGY CONSUMPTION PARAMETERS OF SMART PHONES
Input: N , Mi , i,j , i,j , Pis , Hi , 2 , G, Ci,j
m
, Pi , ti . Cellular tr. Cellular Tail time Idle power
Smart Phones i i i
Output: The offloading decisions {i,j }. power (mJ/s) tail (mJ/s) (sec.) (mJ/s)

1: Initialize all i,j = 0; Galaxy Note 2605 1202.7 9.91 9.64 3.0 0.33 0.10

2: while i remains changing in the iteration do Galaxy Note 2 2796 802.3 9.25 11.70 2.7 0.25 0.40

3: Solve linear optimization problem (16) using CPLEX; Nexus S 1217 650.0 10.20 7.40 3.0 0.34 0.35
4: for Mobile device i = 1 to N do Galaxy Nexus 964 540.0 11.00 22.37 3.0 0.40 0.30
5: Sort {i,j } in ascending order;
6: Reset as many early {i,j } in the queue as possible
to 0 until constraints (14) and (19) are satisfied; TABLE II DESCRIPTION OF TASK SET
7: Update i as Eq. (1);
Workload Allocated computing capacity (GHz)
8: end for Data Size
Task Set density Galaxy Galaxy Galaxy
9: end while (kilobyte) Nexus S
(cycles/bit) Note Note 2 Nexus

Face recognition 31680 60 1.4 1.6 1.0 1.2

400 frame game 2640 2048 1.04 1.2 0.72 0.88

computation complexity of the sorting and resetting process is
Chess: select, move 1584, 2640 400 0.86, 1.04 1.0, 1.2 0.58, 0.72 0.72, 0.88
(N Mi lg Mi +N Mi ). Further, the while-loop needs up to
Virus scanning 32946 300 1.4 1.6 1.0 1.2
Mi iterations to converge. Hence, Algorithm 1 provides a near-
N-queens puzzle: 87.8, 263, 0.5, 0.5, 0.6, 0.6, 0.3, 0.3, 0.4, 0.4,
optimal solution with computation complexity (N 2 Mi3 ). N{4,5,6,7} 1760, 8250
200
0.86, 1.22 1.0, 1.4 0.58, 0.86 0.72, 1.04

Video transcoding 200~1200 10240 0.68 0.8 0.44 0.56

VI. N UMERICAL S IMULATIONS
In this section, we describe our simulation setup of the
system. Then we evaluate the proposed iterative approximation
algorithm for offloading decision by numerical studies.
A. Simulation Setup and Real-World Datasets
First of all, the mobile cloud computing scenario is con-
structed over a hexagonal cellular network with radius 2km.
We assume that the wireless base-station is located at the
center of the hexagonal cell. All mobile devices are randomly
deployed around the wireless base-station. Then, for the wire-
less communication model, we consider the cellular network
scenario, setting the channel bandwidth W = 2 MHz and the
power of background noise 2 = 100 dBm. According to the
physical interference model, the path loss factor a = 2. For the
availability of a wireless fading connection, the SINR coding
gain G is set as 16 dB. Moreover, the CPU clock assigned
from the cloud for each mobile device Cic is 5 GHz.
Without any loss of generality, four types of smartphones
B. The Performance of Proposed Task Offloading Algorithm
In this section, we increase the number of smartphones
from 5 to 50 gradually, and take the average value of 1000
simulations to evaluate the performance of proposed iterative
approximation algorithm (IAA). Furthermore, we compare
the proposed algorithm with the following 3 methods:
Local computing method (LCM): In this method, all
tasks are executed locally on mobile devices, with no
wireless connection and no transmission error.
Random task selection algorithm (RTSA): In this
algorithm, smartphones are selected just as the proposed
IAA algorithm. But tasks on mobile devices are randomly
selected for offloading, so that the transmission error
rate constraint is satisfied. This algorithm has lower
complexity (N Mi 3 ) to find a solution.
All task selection algorithm (ATSA): In this method,

are considered. The realistic parameters of the computing and
communication energy models are specified in Table I. All
the energy consumption parameters are adopted as in [16],
which are measured at various clock speeds and in the cellular
network scenarios by using a Monsoon power monitor. The
transmission error rate constraint is i = 8%. Besides, we
assume the time deadlines Tid should not exceed the time
delay when all tasks are executed locally on the smartphone.
So the time deadlines Tid are set to 167s, 145s, 240s and
197s, respectively. In particular, in the simulation, the type
of mobile device in the mobile cloud computing scenario is
randomly selected among them. As shown in Table II, 10
real-world tasks are adopted for execution. All 10 tasks are
deployed on 4 types of smartphones for execution. On the basis
of these various processing densities, the allocated computing
m
capacities Ci,j are specified.
if the time deadline and the transmission error rate
constraints are satisfied, all tasks on the smartphones
are offloaded onto the cloud side. In contrast, if these
constraints are not satisfied, all tasks are executed local-
ly on the smartphones. The computation complexity is
(N Mi ) for all smartphones.
As shown in Fig. 2, the average energy consumption of
the mobile device with four algorithms are compared. The
mobile device approximately consumes 130.375 J energy with
the LCM. And the IAA, RTSA and ATSA algorithms can
always save energy consumption with cloud offloading service.
With 5 mobile devices, more than 61.38% energy can be saved
with the proposed IAA algorithm. Then with increased mobile
devices, more mutual interference will be caused. With inferior
wireless channel quality, a greater percentage of tasks will be
executed locally. Thus the average energy consumption using

Average energy consumption of smart phones(J)
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
5 10
Fig. 2. The average energy consumption of mobile devices with 1,000 times
of simulations for offloading over a 2km hexagonal cellular network.
200
The average time delay with
local computing method 186.56s
Average time delay of smart phones (s)
180
160
140
120
100
80
5 10
Fig. 3. The average time delay of mobile devices with 1,000 times of
simulations for offloading over a 2km hexagonal cellular network.
IAA method will gradually increase. Although the IAA and
RTSA method select the same number of mobile devices and
tasks for offloading, the proposed IAA method always reveals
more energy saving, because the tasks are randomly selected
in RTSA. At the number of 50, ATSA, RTSA, and IAA need
127.32 J, 128.51 J, and 98.52 J, respectively.
Moreover, Fig. 3 shows that the LCM needs approximately
186.56s to complete the execution. Similarly, the IAA always
obtains less time delay. This is because only part of tasks are
executed locally and the other part are executed on the cloud
side in parallel. As can be seen in Fig. 3, about 46.95% of time
can be saved at the beginning. However, if tasks are randomly
selected with RTSA, more communication intensive but not
computation intensive tasks may be selected. Besides, with
ATSA, all tasks are offloaded or executed locally. Therefore,
more time delay will be caused with RTSA and ATSA. At the
number of 50, ATSA, RTSA, and IAA need 184.26 s, 182.03
s, and 165.17 s, respectively.
VII. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, we investigate the cloud task offloading
decision problem among multiple mobile devices over cellular
networks. Considering the task execution time deadline and
transmission error rate constraints, the offloading decision is
formulated as an NP-hard combinatorial optimization problem.
Then a rapid and efficient iterative approximation algorithm
which combines the problem linearization and decision vari-
ables mapping from integer to the real domain is proposed,
revealing the near-optimal offloading decisions to minimize
The average energy consumption with
the total energy consumption of mobile devices.
local computing method 130.375J
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to acknowledge that this work was
partially supported by the National Natural Science Foun-
Iterative approximation algorithm
dation of China (61379111, 61402538, 61403424, 61672537
Random task selection algorithm and 61672539), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the
All task selection algorithm
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Central South University under Grant 2015zzts056.
Number of Mobile Devices
R EFERENCES
[1] Cisco, Cisco visual networking index: global mobile data traffic forecast
update, 2015-2020, White Paper, 2016.
[2] Y. Wen, W. Zhang and H. Luo, Energy-optimal mobile application
execution: taming resource-poor mobile devices with cloud clones, in
Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, pp. 2716-2720, 2012.
[3] S. Abolfazli, Z. Sanaei, A. Gani and R. Buyya, Cloud-based augmen-
tation for mobile devices: motivation, taxonomies, and open challenges,
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 337-368,
2013.
[4] J. Liu, B. Priyantha, T. Hart, Y. Jin, W. Lee, V. Raghunathan, H. S.
Ramos and Q. Wang, CO-GPS: energy efficient GPS sensing with cloud
offloading, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 15, no. 6, pp.
1348-1361, 2016.
Iterative approximation algorithm
Random task selection algorithm
[5] X. Chen, Decentralized computation offloading game for mobile cloud
All task selection algorithm computing, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol.
26, no. 4, pp. 974-983, 2015.
15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Number of Mobile Devices
[6] Z. Sanaei, S. Abolfazli, A. Gani and R. K. Buyya, Heterogeneity
in mobile cloud computing: taxonomy and open challenges, IEEE
Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 369-392, 2013.
[7] K. Lai, H. Tang, H. Wang, S. Ding and D. Wang, Cloud offloading on
customer-provided resources, in Proc. of IEEE WCNC, pp. 4695-4700,
2013.
[8] L. Yang, J. Cao, S. Tang, T. Li and A. T. Chan, A framework for
partitioning and execution of data stream applications in mobile cloud
computing, ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, vol.
40, no. 4, pp. 23-32, 2013.
[9] J. Chen and V.E. Taylor, Mesh partitioning for efficient use of distributed
systems, IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 13,
no. 1, pp. 67-79, 2002.
[10] E. Cuervo, A. Balasubramanian, D. K. Cho, A. Wolman, S. Saroiu, R.
Chandra and P. Bahl, Maui: making smartphones last longer with code
offload, in Proc. of ACM MobiSys, pp. 49-62, 2010.
[11] W. Zhang, Y. Wen, K. Guan, D. Kilper, H. Luo and D. Wu, Energy-
optimal mobile cloud computing under stochastic wireless channel, IEEE
Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 4569-4581,
2013.
[12] D. Huang, P. Wang and D. Niyato, A dynamic offloading algorithm
for mobile computing, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications,
vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 1991-1995, 2012.
[13] J. Liu, D. Goeckel, D. Towsley. Bounds on the gain of network coding
and broadcasting in wireless networks, in Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, pp.
724-732, 2007.
[14] Y. Fan and Z. Zilic, BER testing of communication interfaces, IEEE
Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 57, no. 5, pp.
897-906, 2008.
[15] T. Capin, K. Pulli and T. Akenine-Moller, The state of the art in mobile
graphics research, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, vol. 28,
no. 4, pp. 74-84, 2008.
[16] J. Kwak, Y. Kim, J. Lee, and S. Chong, DREAM: dynamic resource
and task allocation for energy minimization in mobile cloud systems,
IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 33, no. 12, pp.
2510-2523, 2015
[17] D. Zhang, Y. Zhang, Y. Zhou and H. Liu, Leveraging the tail time
for saving energy in cellular networks, IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1536-1549, 2014.
[18] D. Li and X. Sun, Nonlinear integer programming, vol. 84. Springer,
2006.
[19] IBM ILOG CPLEX [Online]. Available at: http://www-
01.ibm.com/software/integration/optimization/cplex-optimizer/