Skip to content

Adaptive Dual-Layer DRL-Based AI Model Placement, Task Scheduling, and Resource Allocation for Collaborative Edge Inference and Training

Nov 2026 · IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing · Vol 25, pp. 20260-20277 · 0 citations · 47 references

Abstract

In edge intelligence networks, AI model inference and training tasks coexist and complement each other. Inference tasks demand low latency and diversity to support real-time services, whereas training tasks are computationally intensive and rely on distributed user devices (UDs) data for continuous model enhancement.However, existing research often consider inference and training tasks separately, overlooking their joint optimization and the inherently distributed nature of training data. In this paper, we investigate an edge intelligence network that simultaneously supports multiple heterogeneous AI services. We jointly optimize AI model placement, scheduling of inference and training tasks, as well as resource allocation, including transmit power of UDs, transmission rate, and computing resources of edge servers (ESs). To tackle the high complexity of this joint optimization problem, we design an adaptive dual-layer deep reinforcement learning (DRL) framework based on Twin Delayed Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (TD3), with an adaptive optimization timescale adjustment mechanism. The upper-layer policy network adaptively decides AI model placement, while the lower-layer policy network schedules inference and training tasks. The two policy networks operate at different update frequencies, and the AI model placement strategy decided by the upper-layer policy network is taken as part of the state input for the lower-layer policy network. In addition, three embedded numerical subroutines are developed to solve resource allocation sub-problems efficiently. We conducted extensive comparative experiments, and the results show that the proposed algorithm converges faster and reduces the total system cost by 11–32% compared with five other approaches.

View source

Similar papers

#computer vision Review Sep 2017

Agile Software Development Methods: Review and Analysis

This publication proposes a definition and a classification of agile software development approaches and analyses ten software development methods that can be characterized as being "agile" against the defined criterion.

P. Abrahamsson, O. Salo, Jussi Ronkainen et al. · 727 citations · ⚡54
#computer vision Jun 2008

The impact of agile practices on communication in software development

The study shows that agile practices improve both informal and formal communication, but indicates that, in larger development situations involving multiple external stakeholders, a mismatch of adequate communication mechanisms can sometimes even hinder the communication.

M. Pikkarainen, Jukka Haikara, O. Salo et al. · 401 citations · ⚡48
#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Related blog posts

Microsoft Research Blog Oct 6, 2026

What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us

Jennifer Neville did not want to go into computer science—but that’s exactly where she landed. Neville discusses the starts and stops that led to her professional sweet spot and her work identifying “surprising failures” making it hard for AI to handle complexity.  The post What AI gets wrong and what failure teaches us appeared first on Microsoft Research.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.