Loading [MathJax]/extensions/MathMenu.js
Scheduling strategies for the bicriteria optimization of the robustness and makespan | IEEE Conference Publication | IEEE Xplore

Scheduling strategies for the bicriteria optimization of the robustness and makespan


Abstract:

In this paper we study the problem of scheduling a stochastic task graph with the objective of minimizing the makespan and maximizing the robustness. As these two metrics...Show More

Abstract:

In this paper we study the problem of scheduling a stochastic task graph with the objective of minimizing the makespan and maximizing the robustness. As these two metrics are not equivalent, we need a bicriteria approach to solve this problem. Moreover, as computing these two criteria is very time consuming we propose different approaches: from an evolutionary meta-heuristic (best solutions but longer computation time) to more simple heuristics making approximations (bad quality solutions but fast computation time). We compare these different strategies experimentally and show that we are able to find different approximations of the Pareto front of this bicriteria problem.
Date of Conference: 14-18 April 2008
Date Added to IEEE Xplore: 03 June 2008
ISBN Information:
Print ISSN: 1530-2075
Conference Location: Miami, FL, USA
References is not available for this document.

1 Introduction

The problem of scheduling an application modeled by a task graph with the objective to minimize its execution time is a well studied problem [6], [9]. However, in general the duration of the tasks that compose the application and the communications between these tasks are subject to some uncertainties (due to the unpredictability of the behavior of the application and its sensitiveness of the input data). A schedule is said robust if it is able to absorb part of the uncertainty and gives an allocation whose duration (makespan) is still close to a predicted value.

Select All
1.
S. Ali, H. J. Siegel, M. Maheswaran, D. Hensgen, and S. Ali. Representing Task and Machine Heterogeneities for Heterogeneous Computing Systems. Tamkang Journal of Science and Engineering, Special 50th Anniversary Issue, 3(3):195-207, Nov. 2000.
2.
T. Bäck. Evolutionary algorithms in theory and practice: evolution strategies, evolutionary programming, genetic algorithms. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1996.
3.
S. Cahon, N. Melab, and E.-G. Talbi. ParadisEO: A Framework for the Reusable Design of Parallel and Distributed Metaheuristics. Journal of Heuristics, 10(3):357-380, 2004.
4.
L.-C. Canon and E. Jeannot. A Comparison of Robustness Metrics for Scheduling DAGs on Heterogeneous Systems. In HeteroPar'07, pages 568-567, Austin, Texas, USA, Sept. 2007.
5.
K. Deb, S. Agrawal, A. Pratab, and T. Meyarivan. A Fast Elitist Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm for Multi-Objective Optimization: NSGA-II. In Parallel Problem Solving from Nature VI Conference, pages 849-858, Paris, France, 2000.
6.
H. El-Rewini, T. Lewis, and H. Ali. Task Scheduling in Parallel and Distributed Systems. Prentice Hall, 1994.
7.
S. Felsner and K. Reuter. The Linear Extension Diameter of a Poset. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 12(3):360-373, 1999.
8.
J. N. Hagstrom. Computational complexity of PERT problems. Networks, 18(2):139-147, 1998.
9.
J. Y.-T. Leung, editor. Handbook of Scheduling. Chapman & Hall/CCR, 2004.
10.
G. Rudolph. Convergence of Evolutionary Algorithms in General Search Spaces. In International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, pages 50-54, Nagoya, Japan, May 1996.
11.
G. Rudolph and A. Agapie. Convergence Properties of Some Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithms. In Congress on Evolutionary Computation, pages 1010-1016, La Jolla, California, USA, July 2000.
12.
T. Tobita and H. Kasahara. A standard task graph set for fair evaluation of multiprocessor scheduling algorithms. Journal of Scheduling, 5(5):379-394, 2002.
13.
H. Topcuoglu, S. Hariri, and M.-Y. Wu. Performance-Effective and Low-Complexity Task Scheduling for Heterogeneous Computing. Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 13(3):260-274, Mar. 2002.
14.
L. Wang, H. J. Siegel, V. R. Roychowdhury, and A. A. Maciejewski. Task Matching and Scheduling in Heterogeneous Computing Environments Using a Genetic-Algorithm-Based Approach. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 47(1):8-22, Nov. 1997.
15.
E. Zitzler and S. Künzli. Indicator-Based Selection in Multiobjective Search. In Conference on Parallel Problem Solving from Nature (PPSN VIII), pages 832-842. Springer, 2004.
16.
E. Zitzler, L. Thiele, M. Laumanns, C. M. Fonseca, and V. G. da Fonseca. Performance Assessment of Multiobjective Optimizers: An Analysis and Review. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 7(2):117-132, Apr. 2003.

Contact IEEE to Subscribe

References

References is not available for this document.