Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

23rd International Conference on Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering

Systems

Fuzzy Decision Efficiency for Multiprocessor Architecture

Configuration
Najar Yousra*a, Ben Ahmed Samirb
a
University of Tunis el Manar, High Institute of computing (ISI), Tunisia
b
University of Tunis el Manar, Faculty of Science, Mathematics, Physics and Natural, Tunisia

Abstract

Dynamic voltage/frequency scaling (DVFS) has been an efficient technique in exploiting multi-processors
configurable characteristics. However, for large class of embedded real time applications, changing processors
frequency interferes with tasks deadline guarantee. Under homogenous multiprocessor architecture, we are
interested in intelligent offline/online reconfiguration based on fuzzy inference system.
This paper investigates the efficiency of using fuzzy decision in multiprocessor architecture configuration. Goals
of decision making are system schedulability guarantee and energy consumption optimization. Experiments
concern real time periodic tasks scheduled with global EDF and realized over a developed simulation
environment that supports DVFS technique. Different simulations were realized on H264 Video Decoder in order
to evaluate the proposed approach response.

© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of KES International.

Keywords: Fuzzy decisions; DVFS; Energy Optimisation; schedulability; Multiprocessor architecture

* Najar Yousra. Tel.: +21697280234;.

E-mail address: Yousra_najar@yahoo.co.in, yousra.najar@isi.utm.tn

1877-0509 © 2019 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY -NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of KES International.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

1. Introduction

Decision making process is an important topic in Artificial Intelligence. Generally, decision making is modeled
by the quintuplet (A,S,E,K,D). A stands for a set of alternatives or possible actions. S refers to a set of environment
states (different conditions) in which decisions are taken. E is a set of consequences driven from the choice of some
alternatives. K is a mapping A×S→E specifying consequence for each element of the environment. The space A×S
defines the solution space. D, decision function D: E→R, reflects the preference structure of the decision maker [1].
Obviously, modeling decision problems is a tedious task since in real world problems several types of uncertainty
related to decision maker's behavior and states of nature should be considered. The majority of available decision
models refers to probability theory for the representation of uncertainty. Despite the success of this decision models,
it has some limits since it is unable to represent all decision makers’ behaviors. However, this framework is
appropriate only when all numerical data are available, which is not always possible. Indeed, there are some
situations, like the case of total ignorance, which are not well handled and which can make the probabilistic
reasoning unsound. Several non classical theories of uncertainty have been proposed in order to deal with uncertain
and imprecise data such as evidence theory, possibility theory and fuzzy sets theory [28].
Fuzzy logic enables computers to reason about linguistic terms and rules in a way similar to humans [18].
Decision making based on fuzzy logic offers many advantages. It is not only easy to understand and an efficient way
to represent linguistic and subjective attributes of the real world. But it is quicker to define than mapping out every
possible situation of the problem. Many researches applied fuzzy logic, successfully, in decision making,
identification, pattern recognition and control [19]. In fact, there are more than 26 research journals on fuzzy logic
theory and applications [18]. One relevant application of fuzzy logic is making on line decisions to configure multi
core systems in order to reduce energy.
Multi/Many-core systems are prevalent in several application domains targeting different scales of computing
such as embedded and cloud computing. These systems are able to fulfill the ever-increasing performance
requirements by exploiting their parallel processing capabilities. However, effective power/energy management is
required during system operations due to several reasons such as to increase the operational time of battery operated
systems, reduce the energy cost of datacenters, and improve thermal efficiency and reliability. These efforts have
tried to optimize energy by employing three essential ingredients: mapping, dynamic voltage and frequency scaling
(DVFS), and dynamic power management (DPM) [29].
Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling (DVFS) is the focus of much prior research and may be used to reduce
dynamic energy [29]. Vast amount of research exists on DVFS with the main goal of reducing dynamic energy at
runtime while meeting strict performance criteria [23][24][25][26][27]. However, it should be noted that in multi-
supply voltage designs, it is a change in supply voltage that leads to a subsequent change in clock frequency;
therefore static and dynamic power can be impacted by an increase/decrease in clock frequency. An optimal DVFS
algorithm should operate at the lowest supply voltage allowable without causing significant performance
degradation.
Voltage/Frequency mode selection logic determines when to increase/decrease the operating frequency which is a
critical design parameter. Increasing operating frequency during times of low system utilization will consume excess
power whereas decreasing it during times of high system utilization will affect the throughput of the system.
Decisions that affect how to tune the voltage/frequency can significantly affect the performance of system as well as
applications running on multi-cores.
In this paper, we introduce a fuzzy decision making system (FDMS) that configures hardware multiprocessor
architecture through two design parameters: the number of activated processors and their frequencies. The proposed
fuzzy system aimed to optimize energy consumption and to guarantee time contrasts respect. In previous works, this
system proved efficient results on several sets of periodic real time tasks generated with different system charge
values. The chosen frequency scaling factor must give the best possible trade between energy ratio and performance
ratio (number of tasks respecting their deadlines). The major contributions of this research can be distinguished as
follows:
 Conception and development of multiprocessor scheduling simulator that includes schedulability test module (for
Global earliest deadline first algorithm: G-EDF) and energy estimation module. The simulated architectures are
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

composed of cores that support DVFS technique especially the DSR method (Dynamic Slack Reclamation) for
on line power optimization.
 The specification of Closed-loop algorithm for multiprocessor architecture reconfiguration based on fuzzy
inference system. The proposed intelligent decision system calculates the number of activated cores and the
frequency of homogenous processors based on system charge and system estimated energy. It is based on
recursive calculation of the frequency.
 Simulations and results of the approach on H264 Video Decoder, which is a periodic real time system, are
exposed to evaluate the efficiency of the approach over existent models.

Three main parts composed this manuscript: The first paragraph is a state of art about dynamic frequency scaling
in multiprocessing architecture and about fuzzy logic in embedded systems. The second part is dedicated to the
explanation of the proposed algorithm with its different parts: core energy module, system schedulability test
module and fuzzy inference system module. Finally, simulations on H264 Video Decoder with different hypothesis
are detailed to evaluate the approach performance.

2. Related works

Significant research efforts have been devoted to developing tools, such as DVFS, for raising multiprocessor
architecture performances. Indeed, modern CPUs offer a set of acceptable frequencies and the user or the operating
system can modify online their values according to their needs. Usually, a feedback mechanism detecting processor
idle time (slack time: when processors are waiting) to adjust frequency and voltage [3][10][11]. The main idea is to
find the best scaling factor during the computation that avoids wasting cycles by reducing the operating frequency
which reduces the consumed energy while affecting as little as possible the performance (ratio of tasks respecting
deadlines over specific scheduler). Different algorithm based on heuristics and intelligent approaches tries to
calculate the scaling factor. In fact, these algorithms are tightly-coupled with operating system’s task management
services, since the dynamic selection of DVFS must be coupled to task computation time [10]. Intelligent DVFS
approaches are essentially based on tree decision method, neural networks, deep learning [24][25], fuzzy logic
[23][4][5][26][17]…In [23] the author developed an on-line adaptive fuzzy logic controller for DVFS that is able to
accurately and robustly predict and track the workload variations even when those variations are highly non
stationary or soft. The fuzzy logic controller decides about changing the supply voltage of the circuit under control
by observing and predicting the supply-current variations. The use of heuristic based methodologies to design space
optimization for MPSoC involves the knowledge of processor characteristics in order to converge toward a final
solution. Qadri in [4][5] presented a fuzzy based reconfiguration for MPSoc that takes into consideration energy
consumption and throughout of real time system. This work argues the advantages of integration fuzzy inference
system that calculates the number of cores and the operating frequency. A book is published by springer [27]
collected fuzzy logic based approaches that managed multicore architecture configuration for Intel and Xeon. In [26]
a FIS is proposed with power and throughputs as criteria and frequency as decision alternative. Furthermore, in [17]
we had presented a fuzzy inference system that calculates the adequate processor frequency to guarantee energy
optimization. The number of processor was already fixed and the inputs were system charge and normalized energy.
Although the approach was successfully tested on randomly generated periodic tasks, it was obvious that with
important system charges schedulability would not be guarantee.

3. System schedulability and energy of cores

Since DVFS lowers core frequency, execution time of a program running over that scaled down processor may
increase, especially if the program is compute bound. The frequency reduction process can be expressed by the
scaling factor S which is the ratio between the highest available frequency (fmax) for the CPU and the new frequency
(fnew) applied to the CPU, as in Equation (1).

S=fmax/fnew (1)
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

3.1. System workload and schedulability

In this paper, we assume a periodic task model in which each task Γi is defined by (r i1, WCETi, AETi,Ti, Di): ri :
release time, Ti : period, Di : deadline and computation time that could be WCETi (worst case computation time) or
AETi (Actual Execution Time). Furthermore, we focus our attention on implicit deadline task system (Ci<Ti=Di). As
in classical treatments of the real-time scheduling problem [14], the relative deadline is assumed to be equal to
period so a task must complete its execution before its next release. Given that the worst case computation time is
supposed to be the time needed by the task to complete its charge in maximum operating frequency, a real time
scheduler allocates processor time to the task in such way that it respects its deadline. In this section, we try to
establish a relationship between operating frequency and system schedulability. A system is schedulable when all its
tasks respect their deadline under designed architecture and specific real time scheduler. Many schedulability tests
where associated with several schedulers such as global EDF(earliest deadline first). For a set of n periodic tasks,
when we assume that the platform is composed of m identical processors and that Un is system utilization, system
schedulability is assured if this sufficient and necessary condition is satisfied [13][14][15]:
C m
Un = ∑ni=1 Ti ≤ (1)
i S

3.2. Energy of cores

The energy consumption of a program is given by formula equation (3). Many searches divide the power
consumed by a processor into two power metrics: static power and dynamic power [12][10][7][4] [6][2]. The first
one is consumed as long as the computing unit is on; the latter is only consumed during computation times.
𝑡𝑚𝑎𝑥
𝐸 = ∫0 𝑃(𝑡). 𝑑𝑡 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑃 = 𝑃𝑑𝑦𝑛 + 𝑃𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡 (2)

The dynamic power Pdyn is related to the switching activity α, load capacitance C L, the supply voltage V and
operational frequency f, as shown in eq. (4).

𝑃𝑑𝑦𝑛 = 𝛼. 𝐶𝐿 . 𝑉 2 . 𝑓 (3)

For earlier processors static power was considered to be negligible:

𝑃𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑐=𝑉.𝑁.𝑘𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛.𝑙𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑘 (5)

With N: Number of transistor, kdesign: design dependent parameter, lleak : technology dependent parameter. The
dynamic power is reduced by a factor of S when reducing the frequency of a processor by a factor of S. The energy
consumption is measured in Joule, and can be calculated by multiplying the power consumption, measured in watts,
by the execution time of the program as follows: Energy=Power.T.

4. Proposed Approach

A decision making process involves: Identifying the objective/goal of the decision making process, selection of
the criteria, selection of alternatives and aggregation Method. There are two main objectives in this case: minimize
energy consumption and guarantee system schedulability under global EDF. Total system charge and initial
frequency are approach criterion. In fact, mathematical relation between system charge and the frequency make it a
decision-making with interdependent multiple criteria. Decision-making with interdependent multiple criteria is a
surprisingly difficult task. If we have clearly conflicting objectives there normally is no optimal solution which
would simultaneously satisfy all the criteria [28]. In fact in this case, minimizing CPU speed reduces energy
(realizes first objective) but rises computation time and system load (contraries second objective).
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

4.1. DVFS multiprocessor architecture simulator

A lot of researches on design exploration and performance evaluation for embedded systems have been
conducted. As a result of these researches, several simulation environments are proposed, such as MILAN,
Metropolis, STARSoC and SimSoC [30]. The work presented in this article can be seen as complementary to these
environments. We included energy calculation module, schedulability verification module and fuzzy inference
module for offline/online reconfiguration. Figure 1 is an illustration of the main classes of simulator that are:
tasksInfo for periodic application characteristics, ArchitectureInfo for hardware architecture characteristics and
Scheduler characteristics.

Simulation TasksInfo
SchedulerInfo Model

ArchitectureInfo

Fig. 1 Main Classes of Developed Simulator

At this stage, the only adopted scheduler is global earliest deadline first (G-EDF) which is dynamic priority based
algorithm. However, it is possible to add new multiprocessor scheduler algorithms and their schedulability tests.
While creating a new simulation environment, the user must specify temporal characteristics for tasks (ri1, WCETi,
AETi,Ti, Di) and number of available CPU for multiprocessor architecture (number of available CPU, CPU
characteristics, operating frequency/voltage). The simulator calculates online consumed energy, online system load,
ratio of tasks respecting deadline….

4.2. Closed loop reconfiguration algorithm

Figure 2 represents the proposed approach. This approach is based on closed loop with energy aware algorithm
module that takes (m,fn) to calculate the approximated consumed energy and the new Un . Until stabilization, that’s
when FIS generates the same solution, the loop continues to iterate. Fuzzy inference system (FIS) has two inputs Un
and actual CPU frequency fo and calculates the number of processor m and the new CPU frequency fn.

Fig. 2. Fuzzy Configuration energy/feasibility aware approach

 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

4.3. Fuzzy inference system

The main idea of the proposed architecture is to take advantage of fuzzy logic to avoid the establishment of a
model describing the exact relations between input and output parameters. The fuzzy system involves: input and
output variables identification, associating variables with appropriate membership functions, formulating rule base
and defuzzification. Table 1 and Table 2 present the membership functions associated to input linguistic terms. Un is
presented by four terms: {Verylow, Low, Good and High}. System load Un is calculated over m processors then to
guarantee system schedulability it should not exceed the limit one. This concept explains the limits of trapezoidal
membership functions. The universe of discourse varies in positive real values but the interference between sets is
centered on [0-1]. It is explained by the fact that when system charge exceeds the limit the application is not feasible
under Global EDF.

Table 1. Input1 Un membership and fuzzy sets Fig. 3. Un membership and fuzzy sets

Terms Fuzzy Membership

Verylow Trapezoid((-1,0), (0,1), (0.3,1), (0.635,0))
Low Trapezoid((0.284,0), (0.62,1), (0.84,1), (0.986,0))
Good Trapezoid((0.9,0), (0.954,1), (1.02,1), (1.04,0))
High Trapezoid((0.98,0), (1.23,1), (30,1), (32,0))

The second input involved in the FIS is old frequency fo which is represented by four linguistic terms (f0, f1 , f2
, f3) corresponding to the four functional points of our study case CPU. For generic purpose, the number of
membership terms and functions are generated easily depending on the CPU characteristics. In fact, the number of
fuzzy sets is equal to the number of operating frequencies that characterized the chosen processor. Hence, triangular
function centered on a specific operating point is associated with each set. There is not interference between sets
because the information is almost exact about the frequency value. The frequency is also the first output fn which
explains that it is calculated recursively depending on its precedent value. In fact, when the schedulability is
guarantee, the frequency is reduced to minimize consumed energy until it attends the minimal frequency. However,
when the application is not schedulable, the number of processor is augmented and the frequency is set at its
maximal value.

Table 2. Input2: fn membership and fuzzy sets Fig.4. f membership and fuzzy sets
Terms Fuzzy Membership
f0 Triangular((f1-1,0), (f1,1), (f1+1,0))
f1 Triangular((f2-1,0), (f2,1), (f2+1,1))
f2 Triangular((f3-1,0), (f3,1), (f3+1,0))
f3 Triangular((f4-1,0), (f4,1), (f4+1,0))

FIS outputs are the proposed frequency which membership functions are detailed in table 2 and the number of
processors. Table 3 presents three trapezoidal membership functions associated to linguistic terms: inf, same and
sup. The functions are centered around mp (mp = E(Un)+1 with E:integer part), (mp-1) and (mp+1) so the number of
iterations to stabilization will be minimized.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

Table 3. Output1: m membership and fuzzy sets Fig.5. m membership and fuzzy sets for mp=2

Terms Fuzzy Membership

Trapezoid((mp-1.5,0), (mp-1.25,1), (mp-
inf
0.75,1), (mp-0.65,0))
Trapezoid((mp-0.45,0),(mp-0.35,1),
same
(mp+0.35,1), (mp+0.45))
Trapezoid((mp+0.45,0), (mp+0.55,1),
sup
(mp+1.45,1), (mp+1.55))

To establish relationship between the input variables and output parameters, fuzzy logic rules were defined.
There are standard criteria for the definition of the rule base. Figure 6 represents the variation of normalized energy
(En = Enew/Emax) and system charge Un when changing the scaling factor s for two sets of periodic tasks with
different load under Intel x 86 multiprocessor architecture [21]. From some logic facts, mathematical variations and
experimental results, the rule base is constructed: When the system utilization Un is inferior to one then we could
decrease the operating frequency trying to minimize energy consumption and idle time. Working with lower
frequencies must respect schedulabiliy test. When Un is superior to one operating frequency is increased until it
reaches a feasible scenario. If the system charge doesn’t allow it the feed-back module will augment the number of
cores until stabilization.

Fig. 6. Normalized energy/system load variation with different scaling factor – CPU Intel x 86 (Set1 : 3 tasks U=0.8 m=1/ Set 2 : 10 tasks U=1.36
m=1)

Table 4. Rule Base of FSI - Example : rule1 = 'if U is verylow and fo is f1 then fn is f1 and m is same'
f/m Un
verylow Low Good High

f0 f1/same f1/same f1/same f1/same

f1 f1/same f2/same f2/sup f2/sup
fo
f2 f2/same f2/same f3/sup f3/sup
f3 f3/same f3/same f4/sup f4/sup

To explain the system response let’s present the defuzzification results for an application with system charge equal
to 0.5 over one processor which guarantees system schedulability. In fact, the FIS must try to minimise energy by
reducing the frequency to the lower index as figure 7 shows.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

Fig. 7. Defuzzification : for inputs : Un=0.5 fo=720 MHz the FIS generated fn=500 Mhz and m=1

We should mention that an online method DSR (Dynamic Slack Reclamation) for on line power optimization is
used. It uses the slack between WCET and AET to slow down tasks in order to reduce the consumed energy of the
processor. Slacks are consumed over processors equally. In fact the same FIS is activated when task’s instance is
achieved with computation time less than its WCET. New action is proposed by the system with the new
recalculated Un.

5. Results and discussion

Our experiments are executed on multiprocessor scheduling simulator that we develop with python. The fuzzy
logic engine was implemented conforming to TCE 61131-7 standard [20]. The free Fuzzy logic module (Fuzzython)
is an open source class library which is optimized for faster response. The target architectures are multiprocessor
systems composed of identical processors supporting DVFS mechanism (ARM Cortex A8). Table 6 gives the power
consumption of processors for all possible operating points. The scheduler is global EDF, which is dynamic priority
based. The periodic application is H264 video decoder which is composed of seven tasks characterized in table 5.

Table 5. Tasks of the H264 Video Decoder [22][31]

Tasks WCETi(ms) Ti=Di(ms) ri AETi(ms)

T1(new_frame) 1 19 0 1
T2(Nal_Dispatch) 2 5 0 1
T3(Slice1_processing) 38 66 0 21
T4(Slice2_processing) 38 66 1 21
T5(Slice3_processing) 38 66 2 21
T6(Slice4_processing) 38 66 3 21
T7(Rebuild_frame) 2 66 66 1
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

Table 6. Architecture Parameter ARM Cortex A8 [21]

ARM Cortex A8
Parameter Value

Number of cores [1..16]

Processing frequency [125, 250, 500, 520, 720]Mhz
Operating voltage [0975, 1.05, 1.2, 1.27, 1.35]V
Pd [57, 130, 303, 348, 550] mW
Pidle [4, 7, 16, 18, 28] mW

Figure 8 is the log of developed simulator when its three modules are specified as follows: architecture –ARM,
application – H 264 decoder and scheduler – global EDF. Fuzzy offline configuration begins with Un =2.79 for
maximum resources which concluded in system is not schedulable and En = 18.537 mj (considering static
energy=0). As the figure shows, the simulation period is specified by the user. Furthermore, two multiprocessor
architectures are implemented in the simulator which are ARM cortex A8 and Intel x86. The results showed that the
algorithm selects different scaling factors for the architecture depending on Un. The main emphasis of the proposed
fuzzy reconfiguration technique is to assure balance between energy consumption and system schedulability.
However, mainly it represents Decision Support System (DSS) for periodic real time applications configuration. In
order to fulfill our aims, the proposed algorithm starts the iteration 0 with maximum resources which are single core
and operating frequency (fi=fmax=720MHz).

Fig. 8 The log of developed simulator for the video decoder within offline configuration

When the system calls the fuzzy module, it is executed for eight iterations. Figure 9 shows the evolution of the
decision couple (m,f) depending on system estimated energy and its utilization. Final offline decision is m=4 and
f=500Mhz. Figure 10 shows that the energy estimated with maximum resources is less than the energy estimated
with the proposed offline configuration. However, it guarantees, according to figure 11 that illustrates the ratio of
tasks meeting their deadlines, system schedulability. We could understand that the approach gives priority to system
schedulability over energy optimization. In fact, offline estimated energy is saved with 33% from predicted energy.
In run-time the fuzzy module was executed 7 times over period of 50ms.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

3000 Energy Consumption (10*nJ)

Decision Evolution path
0.55
0.69
2500 0.93
0.73
1.39 0.92
0.92 1.15
1.84 1.22 1.15
2000 2.79
125 Mhz
1500 250 Mhz
500 Mhz
1000
720 Mhz

500

0
1 processor 2 processor 3 processor 4 processor 5 processor
configuration configuration configuration configuration configuration

Fig. 9 Offline configuration: Decision evolution and stabilization

2500
Estimated Energy (nJ)
2000 Fig. 5 Energy consumption

1500

1000

500

0
Maximum Resources Offline fuzzy configuration Online fuzzy configuration

Fig. 10 Estimated Energy consumption

In [31], the authors search to find the best configuration for the same applications taking into account only the
optimization of energy consumption (functional and transitional level). They found that the best configuration is 2
processors while they are not targeting the schedulability factor. Therefore, results are depending on targeted
parameters. Also the H264 is chosen in our paper as a reference representing a large spectrum of periodic
applications.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

120
Effectivness Ratio % (tasks respecting deadlines)
100
80
60
40
20
0
Maximum Ressources Offline fuzzy configuration Online fuzzy configuration

Fig. 11 Number of tasks respecting deadlines

6. Conclusion

In this paper a novel reconfiguration fuzzy based algorithm for multicore architecture is presented. The proposed
technique was used to find an overall balance between the schedulability of real time periodic application and
energy consumption of the multicore architecture. A higher priority was attributed to system schedulability while
writing the algorithm. A simulation environment was developed using python to predict energy, configure the
architecture and simulate the EDF scheduling and outcomes. The results discussed below showed that the FIS
responded efficiently in offline and online mode. Therefore, it can be concluded that the proposed reconfigurable
fuzzy logic can produce an overall good performance where there is no need for exhaustive mathematical model. In
fact, generic aspect of FIS is important to simulate different CPU architectures. In fact, the number of membership
functions associated to frequency value can be parameterized depending on the hardware characteristics.
In another side, the proposed configurations optimized energy consumption and generated no missed deadlines
under EDF when Un is appropriate. Some configurations were rejected although energy was lower than the chosen
actions because of schedulability issue. However, it will be interesting to study the effect of cache size and
associability on energy consumption. In future work, we intend to study the effect of offline FIS activations on
computation time of the whole system.

References
1. Pomerol, J. (1997) “Artificial Intelligence and Human Decision making. ” European Journal of Operational Research 2(99),
3–25.
2. Nazmul H., Md. A. Fayezul I., Priyanka B. & Tahira Y. (2016) “Research on Energy Efficiency in Cloud Computing. ”
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 7(8), 358-367.
3. Char, J. C., Fakhfakh A., Couterrier, R., Glerch, A. ,(2016) “Dynamic Frequency Scaling for Energy Consumption
Reduction in synchronous distributed applications. ” In: 13th IEEE International Symposium on Parallel and Distributed
Processing with Applications.
4. Qadri, M.Y. and al. (2015) “Fuzzy logic based energy and throughput aware design space exploration for MPSoCs. ”
Microprocess. 3(2). 68-73.
5. Qadri, M.Y. and al. (2014) “Energy and throughputs aware fuzzy logic based reconfiguration for MPSoC. ” Journal of
intelligent and fuzzy systems, 3(2). 68-73.
6. Fakhfakh, M. M. (2016) “Energy consumption optimization of parallel applications with iterations using CPU frequency
scaling.” Thesis.
 Author name / Procedia Computer Science 00 (2019) 000–000

7. Rauber, T., Runger G., Schwind, M., Xu, M., and Melzner, S. (2014) “Energy measurement, modeling, and prediction for
processors with frequency scaling. ” The Journal of Supercomputing, 70(3),1451–1476.
8. Rountree, B., Lowenthal, D., Funk, S., Freeh, V. W., Supinski, B. De, and M. Schulz. (2007) “Bounding energy
consumption in large-scale MPI programs.” Proceedings of the 2007 ACM/IEEE Conference , pp. 1–9.
9. Cochran, R., Hankendi, C., Coskun, A., and Reda, S. (2011) “Identifying the optimal energy-efficient operating points of
parallel workloads.” Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, ser. ICCAD ’11. NJ, USA:
IEEE Press, pp. 608–615.
10. Henkel, J., and al. (2007) “Designing Embedded Processors: A lower Power Perspective. ” Springer.
11. Thiago R. da Rosa, Vivian Larrea, Ney Calazans, Fernando Gehm Moraes. (2012) “Power consumption reduction in
MPSoCs through DFS. ” SBCCI, 1-6.
12. Parain, F., Banâtre, M., Cabillic, G., Higuera-Toledano, T., Issarny, V., Lesot. (2001) “Techniques de réduction de la
consommation dans un système embarqué temps réel. ” Technique et Science Informatique, 20(10): 1247-1278.
13. Nicolat Navet and Bruno Grajar. (2006) “Systèmes temps réel. ” Hermes.
14. Baker TP, Cirinei M. (2006). “A necessary and sometimes sufficient condition for the feasibility of sets of sporadic hard-
deadline tasks. ” In: Proceedings of IEEE real-time systems symposium (RTSS), pp 178– 190.
15. Jing, L., and al. (2014).“Global EDF scheduling for parallel real time tasks. ” Real Time Systems. Springer.
16. Ibrahim, A. (2000) “Fuzzy Logic for Embedded Systems Applications.” Butterworth, Heinemann, Newton, MA, USA.
17. Najar, Y., Ben Ahmed, S. (2017). “Fuzzy Multiprocessor Architecture Reconfiguration based on Dynamic Frequency
Scaling.” ISKE, pp.761-767.
18. Bellman, R. and Zadeh, L. A. (1970). “Decision making in a fuzzy environment. ” Management Sciences, 17:141-164.
19. Kickert, W. “Fuzzy Theories on Decision Making: A Critical Review. ” Frontiers in System Research. Springer US (1979).
20. IEC, (2000). International Standard: Programmable Controllers – Part 7: Fuzzy Control Programming. International
Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland, iEC Standard
21. Intel, Embedded Ultra-Low Power Intel486? GX Processor Datasheet, Intel
22. Chetto, M. (2014) “Ordonnancement dans les systèmes temps réel : optimisation de la consommation énergétique. ” ISTE
éditions.
23. Reza P., H., Diego Echeverri E., J., Pineda G. (2012) “Synthesis and VHDL Implementation of Fuzzy Logic Controller for
Dynamic Voltage and Frequency Scaling (DVFS) Goals in Digital Processors. ” Fuzzy Logic - Controls, Concepts, Theories
and Applications.
24. Shen, H., Lu, H., Qiu, Q. (2012) “Learning Based DVFS for Simultaneous Temperature, Performance and Energy
Management. ” ISQED.
25. Gaurav Dhiman, Tajana Simunic Rosing. (2007)“Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling for Multi-tasking Systems Using
Online Learning. ISLPED, 207-212.
26. Shaheryar N., Jameel A. (2018) “Real-Time Implementation of Fuzzy Logic Based DVFS For Leon3 Architecture. ” Asian
Journal of engineering, sciences & technology, 8(1).
27. Ahmed, J., Yakoob Siyal, M.,Najam, S., Najam, Z. (2017) “Fuzzy Logic Based Power-Efficient Real-Time Multi-Core
System. Springer Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, Springer .
28. Carlsson, C., and Fullér, R.(2001) “Fuzzy multiple criteria decision making: Recent developments. ” Fuzzy Sets and Systems
78, 139-153.
29. Singh, Amit, Leech, Charles, Basireddy, Karunakar Reddy, Al-Hashimi, Bashir and Merrett, Geoffrey. (2017) “Learning-
based run-time power and energy management of multi/many-core systems: current and future trends.” Journal of Low
Power Electronics.
30. Shemary, M. (2015) “Etude et evaluation des politiques d'ordonnancement temps reel multiprocesseur . ” Thesis.
31. Ouni, B., Mhedhbi, I., Trabelsi, C., Atiallah R., Beleudy, C. (2016) “Multi-level energy/power-aware design methedology for
MPsoc” Journal of parallel distributed computing, Elseiver.
Alali, A., and Assaya, I., and Sadik M. (2014) “Modeling and simulation of multiprocessor systems MPSoC by
SystemC/TLM”