Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Energy-Efficient Scheduling with Predictions

Eric Balkanski, Noemie Perivier, Clifford Stein, Hao-Ting Wei

TL;DR

The paper tackles energy-efficient scheduling with predictions by introducing the General Energy-Efficient Scheduling with Predictions (GESP) model and a two-phase algorithm (TPE) that combines offline planning on predicted jobs with online handling of actual arrivals. By proving that the algorithm achieves $1+\varepsilon$-consistency while remaining $O(1)$-robust, and that the competitive ratio c(η) degrades smoothly with prediction error η, the work provides strong, tunable guarantees beyond prior deadlines-focused results. The framework applies to diverse GES objectives, including energy-plus-flow-time and deadlines, and extends to approximate predictions via a shift-tolerance extension (TPE-S) with rigorous smoothness-based analysis. Empirical results on real and synthetic datasets corroborate the theoretical findings, showing improved performance when predictions are accurate and bounded degradation under errors. Overall, the work offers a practical, flexible approach for leveraging predictions to improve energy-efficient scheduling in data-centers and similar systems.

Abstract

An important goal of modern scheduling systems is to efficiently manage power usage. In energy-efficient scheduling, the operating system controls the speed at which a machine is processing jobs with the dual objective of minimizing energy consumption and optimizing the quality of service cost of the resulting schedule. Since machine-learned predictions about future requests can often be learned from historical data, a recent line of work on learning-augmented algorithms aims to achieve improved performance guarantees by leveraging predictions. In particular, for energy-efficient scheduling, Bamas et. al. [BamasMRS20] and Antoniadis et. al. [antoniadis2021novel] designed algorithms with predictions for the energy minimization with deadlines problem and achieved an improved competitive ratio when the prediction error is small while also maintaining worst-case bounds even when the prediction error is arbitrarily large. In this paper, we consider a general setting for energy-efficient scheduling and provide a flexible learning-augmented algorithmic framework that takes as input an offline and an online algorithm for the desired energy-efficient scheduling problem. We show that, when the prediction error is small, this framework gives improved competitive ratios for many different energy-efficient scheduling problems, including energy minimization with deadlines, while also maintaining a bounded competitive ratio regardless of the prediction error. Finally, we empirically demonstrate that this framework achieves an improved performance on real and synthetic datasets.

Energy-Efficient Scheduling with Predictions

TL;DR

The paper tackles energy-efficient scheduling with predictions by introducing the General Energy-Efficient Scheduling with Predictions (GESP) model and a two-phase algorithm (TPE) that combines offline planning on predicted jobs with online handling of actual arrivals. By proving that the algorithm achieves -consistency while remaining -robust, and that the competitive ratio c(η) degrades smoothly with prediction error η, the work provides strong, tunable guarantees beyond prior deadlines-focused results. The framework applies to diverse GES objectives, including energy-plus-flow-time and deadlines, and extends to approximate predictions via a shift-tolerance extension (TPE-S) with rigorous smoothness-based analysis. Empirical results on real and synthetic datasets corroborate the theoretical findings, showing improved performance when predictions are accurate and bounded degradation under errors. Overall, the work offers a practical, flexible approach for leveraging predictions to improve energy-efficient scheduling in data-centers and similar systems.

Abstract

An important goal of modern scheduling systems is to efficiently manage power usage. In energy-efficient scheduling, the operating system controls the speed at which a machine is processing jobs with the dual objective of minimizing energy consumption and optimizing the quality of service cost of the resulting schedule. Since machine-learned predictions about future requests can often be learned from historical data, a recent line of work on learning-augmented algorithms aims to achieve improved performance guarantees by leveraging predictions. In particular, for energy-efficient scheduling, Bamas et. al. [BamasMRS20] and Antoniadis et. al. [antoniadis2021novel] designed algorithms with predictions for the energy minimization with deadlines problem and achieved an improved competitive ratio when the prediction error is small while also maintaining worst-case bounds even when the prediction error is arbitrarily large. In this paper, we consider a general setting for energy-efficient scheduling and provide a flexible learning-augmented algorithmic framework that takes as input an offline and an online algorithm for the desired energy-efficient scheduling problem. We show that, when the prediction error is small, this framework gives improved competitive ratios for many different energy-efficient scheduling problems, including energy minimization with deadlines, while also maintaining a bounded competitive ratio regardless of the prediction error. Finally, we empirically demonstrate that this framework achieves an improved performance on real and synthetic datasets.
Paper Structure (47 sections, 29 theorems, 84 equations, 3 figures, 1 table, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 47 sections, 29 theorems, 84 equations, 3 figures, 1 table, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Lemma 3.0

Let $\mathcal{J}_1$ be a set of jobs and $S_1$ be a feasible schedule for $\mathcal{J}_1$, let $\mathcal{J}_2$ be a set of jobs and $S_2$ be a feasible schedule for $\mathcal{J}_2$. Consider the schedule $S:= S_1+S_2$ for $\mathcal{J}_1 \cup \mathcal{J}_2$ which, at each time $t$, runs the machine a

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: The competitive ratio achieved by our algorithm, TPE-S, and the benchmark algorithm, as a function of the error parameter $\sigma$ (from left-most to the second from the right), and the competitive ratio of TPE-S for a larger range of $\sigma$, as a function of $\sigma$ (right-most).
  • Figure 2: The competitive ratio achieved by our algorithm, TPE-S, as a function of the shift tolerance parameter $\eta^{\text{shift}}$ (left) and as a function of the confidence parameter $\lambda$ (right).
  • Figure 3: The competitive ratio achieved by our algorithm, TPE-S and the benchmark algorithm as a function of the shift tolerance $\eta^{shift}$ (row 1) and as a function of the confidence parameter $\lambda$ (row 2).

Theorems & Definitions (46)

  • Lemma 3.0
  • Lemma 3.0
  • proof
  • Corollary 3.0
  • Theorem 3.1
  • Corollary 3.1
  • Proposition A.1
  • proof
  • Lemma A.1
  • Lemma A.2
  • ...and 36 more