10 4018@ijcac 2020040101

International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing
Volume 10 • Issue 2 • April-June 2020
Efficient Metaheuristic Population-

Based and Deterministic Algorithm for
Resource Provisioning Using Ant Colony
Optimization and Spanning Tree
Muhammad Aliyu, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria
Murali M, SRM institute of science and technology, Tamil Nadu, India
Abdulsalam Y. Gital, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi, Nigeria
Souley Boukari, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa |University, Bauchi, Nigeria
ABSTRACT
Resource provisioning is the core function of cloud computing which is faced with serious challenges
as demand grows. Several strategies of cloud computing resources optimization were considered
by many researchers. Optimization algorithms used are still under reckoning and modification so
as to enhance their potentials. As such, a dynamic scheme that can combine several algorithms’
characteristics is required. Quite a number of optimization techniques have been reassessed based
on metaheuristics and deterministic to map out with the challenges of resource provisioning in the
Cloud. This research work proposes to involve the ant colony optimization (ACO) population-based
mechanism by extending it to form a hybrid meta-heuristic through deterministic spanning tree (SPT)
algorithm incorporation. Extensive experiment conducted in the cloudsim simulator provided an
efficient result in terms of faster convergence, and makespan time minimization as compared to other
population-based and deterministic algorithms as it significantly improves performance.
Keywords
Cloud Computing, Deterministic, Dynamic, Metaheuristics, Optimization, Scheduling
1. INTRODUCTION
Cloud service providers (CSP) nowadays depend on consolidated and large datacenters for the
provisioning of resources and services. As such, quite a number of challenges are encountered by
the computing systems as mentioned by Balamurugan et al. (2015) to include effective resource
provisioning, pricing, SLA, security, and reliability. Effective resource provisioning in Cloud means
optimal allocation resources in least time for the jobs requested by users. Cloud users submit their
demands to the CSPs in form of task request for Virtual Machine (VM) allocation. Since there are
many users with different demands, there will be many task requests pending to be executed for each
VM. Task scheduling belongs to the NP-hard/NP-complete problems where time-scheduling strategies
DOI: 10.4018/IJCAC.2020040101

Copyright © 2020, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

1
need to be improved (Poopak and Nima, 2017). Task scheduling according to Q. Huang and T. Huang
(2012) are based on cloud service, real time, workflow, user level and dynamic/static scheduling. In
dynamic scheduling, scheduler determines the nature of executing user’s jobs as opposed to static
scheduling that executes based on pre-fetched data required for task execution. The advantage of
dynamic scheduling over static scheduling is that dynamic algorithms can handle dependencies that
are not known unlike the static algorithms. Thus, this study is focused on dynamic algorithms due
to the dynamic nature of cloud.
Quite a number of dynamic scheduling techniques have been reassessed based on metaheuristics
and deterministic to map out with the challenges of resource provisioning. Deterministic techniques
follow a stringent procedure of defined sequence of operation in solving task solution disputes which
are often times reportedly inaccurate/inconclusive, hence gets trapped in local optimum. Metaheuristic
on the other hand are sets of algorithmic concepts applicable to a broad set of various problems. Dorigo
et al., (2006) defined metaheuristic as an algorithmic framework for general purpose applicable in
various optimization problems with comparatively little alterations. They permit approximate good
quality solutions to be found in many hard optimization problems within relatively short time period.
Examples of metaheuristics include ACO, clonal selection (CS), genetic algorithm (GA) and so on.
The popularity of metaheuristics is continuously increasing due to its effectiveness and efficiency in
solving complex and large problems.
2. BACKGROUND
ACO is a member of the metaheuristic algorithm that follows real ant colony foraging behavior
principle. Ant’s behavioral means of communication is by through pheromone (chemical substance)
that enables them to find shortest path from their nest to food source. Secreted pheromone at the
cause of searching their food is used for exchanging information while trailing for the shortest path.
Path with the highest concentration of the substance is regarded as the shortest path. ACO has
flourished in areas for solving job shop scheduling problem (Hadi and Reza, 2011), multidimensional
knapsack problem (Ines et al., 2004), Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP) (Harshitha and Beena,
2017), scheduling of tasks in grid and Cloud (Tawfeeq et al., 2013), quadratic assignment problem
(Rainer, 2013) and many more. The algorithm performs exigently in solving problems having to do
with discrete optimization that needs to discover short routes to goals. Despite the plethora adoptions
of ACO in such fields, the algorithm still needs some improvements in handling transition loops
that leads to longer convergence time, initial population generation and pheromone evaporation.
Best performing techniques make intensive use of its optional local search phase and proper initial
solutions generation (Dorigo, 2006).
Researchers have strongly suggested that a solid theoretical framework is required for the
development of ACO (Dorigo et al, 2006). Early investigation regarding simplified framework was
conducted by Merkle and Middendorf, (2002) and that of convergence proof by Gutjahr, (2003).
Neumann and Witt (2006, 2009) and Gutjahr (2008) independently conducted the first rigorous
probing on ACO regarding convergence using simple pseudo-Boolean functions optimization. The
algorithm presented by Neumann and Witt (2009) memorizes the best solution if found and was termed
‘1-ANT’. Iterations are performed to obtain pheromone result. Pheromone evaporation parameter is
measured according to a scale 0 < P < 1, where P is pheromone concentration for new-best-solution.
Iteration with the least p value is recorded as the best and feasible solution. If the evaporation factor of
1-Ant is too small, the algorithm stagnates on simple problems (Doerr et al., 2011). To mitigate such
occurrence, Stutzle and Hoos (2011) reinforce the best solution found in every iteration and termed
it as MAX-MIN Ant System (MMAS). Best-so-far update strategy was used to avoid the stagnation
resulting to efficient convergence for various problems by Orlin et al., (2011). Sudholt (2011), also
make use of the reinforcement learning for the best solution created in the current iteration and was
termed as ‘iteration-best update’.
2
The concept of hybridizing ACO with local search was first seen in (Neumann et al., 2011).
The authors demonstrated the use of local search for artificially constructed problems in turning to
polynomial using exponential run time with high probability. With convergence problems in ACO,
Neumann and Witt (2009) showcased an analysis for minimum Spanning Tree (SPT). The authors
also provided a guideline for the construction process on the impact of heuristic information. To our
knowledge, this is the first application of ACO and SPT for eliminating loops in order to obtain faster
convergence. Numerous researchers recently proposed several hybrid ACO algorithms (Guo, 2016;
Anupama et al, 2017; Rajalakshmi et al., 2017; Shabeera et al., 2016) in cloud task scheduling. Some
of these techniques scale well in terms of convergence, throughput, makespan, execution time, and
waiting time. These algorithms do still necessitate some betterment in order to cope with the actual
resources allocation in Cloud.
The aim of this research work is to design a framework for an improved ACO principle with
SPT in task scheduling. A loop free network is targeted to be achieved in determining the shortest
path for faster convergence. Presence of transition loops is vividly clear to cause longer convergence
time which makes it a perfect theoretical investigation.
3. METHODOLOGY
The constraint satisfaction rule for makespan minimization adopted in (Shabeera et al., 2016) failed to
address the issue of transition loops which causes delay in convergence and longer time of the assigned
couplings. The proposed research will focus on improving the rule by injecting the mechanism of loop
free SPT algorithm to improve on convergence, makespan time and cost in multi-dimensional spaces.
3.1. Problem Formulation

For sufficient scheduling of resources where tasks can be executed by cloud users, each task requires
sufficient hardware components (processor, RAM, and bandwidth). For m heterogeneous VMs; vm1,
vm2, vm3, …, vmm running in the environment of cloud, here, scheduler tries to map Ti task to vmj VM.
The value of Decision Variable DVij if task Ti is matched with VM, vmj = 1, otherwise = 0:
1, if Ti is assigned for vmi

DVij (1)
0, otherwise
When user demands for cloud services in form of task request, scheduler assigns a VM for
necessary actions. Decision variable as can be seen from equation (1) is 1 for successful assignment,
otherwise is 0:
MLi
ET i (2)
Ps*Rs*Qn*Bs
where:
ET (i) is Execution Time

MLi is Million Lines of instruction
Ps is Processor speed
Rs is capacity of RAM
Qn is number of processor and RAM
Bs is bandwidth in mbps (megabit per second)
3
Equation 2 illustrates execution time at an instant i for a specific VM using time shared mechanism.
VM receives user job for processing in millions of instruction length. Processing rate here is based on
the quality of hardware resource configurations. The mechanism for space shared here; execution of
task will be carried out one after the other implying CPU executes one task per CPU/core. DVij will
be applicable in waiting queue for remaining incoming tasks for VM assignment. Remaining time
is the overhead or time interval between when a user job is submitted for assignment and the delay
experienced before execution starts. When a user job is submitted, it has to be put in ready queue for
it to be scheduled for VM assignment:
RTi = WTi - ETi (3)
Equation 3 defines the resource provisioning remaining time. Here, WTi is the workload
submission time for jobs to be assigned to a VM and ETi is the execution start time for submitted
jobs after leaving the ready queue. The WTi as shown in equation 4 must be greater than or equal to
the ETi for task execution to avoid resource contention:
WTi >= ETj (4)
where task are executing without delay; VM execution time is given in equation 5 as:
n
ETi max Execution time of task Ti * Decision Variable DVij (5)
i 1
Speeding up the execution of tasks seeks to determine system performance through pipelining.
Sufficient pipelined system also produces better system throughput (million number of task request
completed per unit time). With an efficient technique in cloud platform, incorporating the smallest
amount of extra resources as possible increases its scalability leading to better performance (Luis
et al., 2019). Scalable techniques in Cloud also burst traffic and heavy workloads to cope with the
voluminous services demanded. Optimization metric used in this research is based on makespan time
minimization. Makespan is the most populous optimization metric used in cloud computing (Mala
and Sarbjeet, 2015) as clients look for the fastest application while CSPs tries to service more users
to earn more profit (Sujata et al., 2017). Makespan covers the earliest start time on the first VM to
the last finish time of the last VM:
m
Makespan Time t min Execution time of VM (6)
j 1
As can be seen from equation 6, makespan time covers task execution time length elapsed
for VM1, VM2, …, VMm. Multi-objective resource provisioning constrained problem seeks to get
the shortest logical time span, by efficiently using available resources as possible to achieve
the minimum makespan.
3.2. System Architecture

The proposed system architecture comprises of three major components; improved ACO module,
improved SPT module and hybridized ACO-SPT. Cloud users’ send and receive their jobs request
through the edge path (see Figure 1). Edge path sends and receives N number of independent task
4
Figure 1. Proposed ACO-SPT model diagram
for Million instructions Length (MLi) to and from the VMs. VMs query (communicate) each other
in form of broadcast for information exchange.
From Figure 1, VM1 communicates to VM2. VM2 reach VM3 at ‘x’ and VM4 at ‘y’. The
redundant link between VM3 and VM4 will also send message y to VM3 and message x to VM4.
As such, there is high tendency of occurrence of transition loops which can cause convergence delay
amounting to CPU, memory and bandwidth wastage. Datacenterbroker is the core infrastructural
service level model composing of primary and secondary controllers. The primary controller is
responsible for defining paths to be transverse for both artificial ants and heterogeneous/homogeneous
tasks set. Artificial ants are used here in determining how the transition is going to take place for
information exchange to avoid loop occurrence. In case of any failure by the primary controller, the
secondary controller acts as backup for subsequent path determination.
3.2.1. Improved ACO Module

With improved ACO algorithm, Si stage representation is adopted for each ant, where each sk has
Sj states represented using connected graph G = (Si, Sj). A complete and feasible multi-objective
resource allocation solution is formulated when the shortest path is formed in G. Ants conduct
transversal in order to look for optimal paths in reaching all VMs through a probabilistic function.
Optimal elaboration will be performed by each ant in its current state for the remaining trails. The
trail and stage are the two activities for the foraging behavior. Slight modification is conducted on
the initial population for the ACO.
3.2.2. Initial Population

A good initial population generation approach provides a promising advantage for optimization
in solving dynamic problems. It provides a finite initial state space the chances for designing new
metaheuristics (Dorigo et al., 2006). Ants here construct a probability parameter for iteration through
all the given VMs. Beginning from a random VM; an ant chooses succeeding VM using pheromone
5
and heuristic information. Each transition can be represented as (Si, Sj), i, j ∈ (1 ... n) of VMs where Si
and Sj denote stage and state respectively. Pheromone information will be denoted as ξi,j and heuristic
information denoted by Ɽi,j.
1
Ɽi,j = (7)
L i, j
Equation 7 denotes the Heuristic value, where Li, j is the length between VMi and VMn. The
heuristic function Ɽi,j will be used as the algorithms’ probability parameter iterating at a range 0
≤ Ɽi,j < 1. Ants make use of the parameter for choosing vmi to vmj from the set G of VMs which
have not been transverse before. All outputs obtained will get closer and closer to 1 in achieving
convergence. Entire system convergence here is based on probability distribution (Ti,J) over G
as shown from equation 8.
ℜ (i, j ) ⋅ ξ (i, j )
Ti,J = σ
(8)
G ⋅ ξ (i, j ) ⋅ ℜ (i, j )
n
∑ i , j =1
The overall ACO-SPT objective here is to optimize Ɽi,j and ξi,j. σ is the relative influence constant
to determine paths transversal for ants in making decisions.
3.2.3. Improved SPT Module

A graph’s spanning tree is its subset having all the nodes connected with least possible number
of arcs. Furthermore, spanning trees have no loops or cycles and cannot be disconnected
(Frank and Carsten, 2006). Improved SPT here will come up with a transition operator as a
relative influence to eliminate loops in the set G = (N, M). When cloud users request for job(s),
spanning tree stops all redundant paths that could cause loop resulting in convergence delay,
ensuring the existence of only one logical path between all destinations in the cloud. If users’
request is intentionally prevented from entering or leaving a path, that path will be considered
as blocked path. That won’t include the artificial ants by ACO-SPT for determining topology.
To provide redundancy, the physical paths will still exist. But these paths will be in disable
state to mitigate the occurrence of transition loops. If the path is ever required to indemnify
for a path disruption, SPT will allow the redundant path to become active by recalculating the
topology and unblocks the necessary path. Five path states will be adopted for this operation
as shown on Figure 2.
• Designated - a VM path will be considered designated if it can ingrerss or egress out tasks
requests to other VMs.
• Non-designated- a VM path is to be considered non-designated if tasks request are not allowed
but allows the transversal of artificial ants to determine best path.
• Root- a VM path will be considered a root path if it connects directly to the root bridge. Root-
bridge here is the VM serving as the focal point for determining best paths to reach other VMs.
• Blocked – a path or edge will be considered blocked if for security or access control, a path
is permanently blocked to prevent all passage. A blocked path will remain blocked except if
activated by the administrator.
• Edge – a path will be considered as edge path if it can ingress and egress out user task requests.
6
Figure 2. Five VM path states
The 5 path definition will be used to control activities from the DataceterBroker for establishing
negotiations between VMs in the cloud environment. It will also ensure QoS through VM path
definition in providing policy for the allocation of VMs to users.
3.2.4. Hybridized ACO- SPT

Hybridized ACO-SPT module is responsible for scheduling resources that have no similar
computation performance and resource costs. Entire scheduling here is expected to accept varying
number of tasks, average machine instruction (processing capacity of each resource in million
instructions per second) of tasks, deviation percentage of machine instruction granularity size,
and processing overhead for all the tasks. Path assignment will also be carried out in this module
in accordance to VM path states.
The algorithm here determines ant task movement in accordance to path definition. Parameter
chosen here for the topology formation is based on the VMs, probability distribution, pheromone
information and heuristic information to determine paths assignment. From the algorithm (Figure
3), the first 2 steps determine the root bridge and backup bridge that will serve as the focal point
for topology determination. All paths will be determined from the root bridge location in reaching
all VMs. The first VM automatically becomes the root bridge while the second VM becomes the
backup which becomes active in case the root bridge fails. Pheromone and heuristic information
that determines ant movement defines paths from the root bridge ensuring one and only one vmj
transversal for the VMi. Relative influence is also attached to the probability distribution function
for task assignment. It is believed after proper path and state definition; probability distribution
will ensure loop free transition. After successful definition of path states, transition loops will be
avoided and the system will converge in least time. As such, effective tasks scheduling will be
achieved optimizing computation/communication ratio thereby making the system more scalable.
With the increase number of cloud users, scalable systems like ACO-SPT will handle a growing
amount of task requests making it more robust to accommodate that growth.
3.3. Convergence Rate

m
Consider lim Makespan (t) = lim ∑Executiontimeoftask(Ti) (9)

t→∞ t→∞
j
7
Figure 3. ACO-SPT Algorithm
Taking the limit (from equation 6) for the makespan time covers task execution time length
needed to achieve faster convergence rate. Convergence condition can be demonstrated according to
solution history based on reduction as:
0, if , max ℜi, j ) < 1


lim T =  (10)
t=1→ m 1, ℜi, j = 1

The algorithm convergence condition is based on the probability distribution. The probability
distribution is a function between 0 and 1. It covers time to transverse VM1 to VMm where total
heuristic function iterates when less than 1 and terminates at an absolute value of 1.
4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND RESULT
We assume that there is no precedence constraint between tasks i.e., tasks are mutually independent.
Tasks also cannot be interrupted of moved to another processor during execution, i.e. no preemption.
Simulation scenario used in this study includes a data center with 10 PMs, 40VMs and also a
range of 10-120 tasks length ranging from 20000-500000 ML length. Four Dell PMs used run at
8
3.0 GHz [CO(TM) i7-3540M Intel (R)], 16GB primary memory, and 2TB secondary storage. The
remaining six are Linovo with 2.7 GHz [CO(TM) i5-2540M Intel (R)], 8GB primary memory, and
1TB secondary storage. Each VM runs at 128MB with a storage capacity of 4GB that randomly
selects PM processor. Cloudsim version 3.0 toolkit was used which combined various features such
as containers, modeling of Web applications on multi-clouds and VM extensions with performance
monitoring. Based on different number of task with random length cloudlet (tasks), the simulation
was run for more than 3 hours (150 times approximately) and the result was calculated using the
policy of space shared in cloudsim.
5. ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
After an in-depth computation and analysis of experimental results, a set of tasks ranging from 10-30
were executed on 10VMs, 20-50 on 20VMs, 40-100 on 30VMs and 80-120 on 40 VMs.
5.1. Makespan Time

Table 1 records each algorithm’s makespan time based on the number of tasks and VMs used to
achieve required result.
As can be seen from the table, ACO-SPT records the least time as compared to the benchmarked
algorithms. From Figures 4 to 7, makespan times are shown in seconds (due to cloudsim relative time
unit) from the y-axis with the total number of VMs on the x-axis.
With 10VMs running 10 tasks (million instruction length); ACO-SPT takes a time of 620 seconds
as compared to PSO that takes 656 seconds, ACO 643 seconds, SPT 622 seconds and RR 680 seconds.
With increase in number of tasks, makespan time also increases except for ACO-SPT as it normalizes
due to the convergence rate. At the last lap of the simulation with the highest number of tasks (120)
Table 1. Comparison of makespan
ACO-SPT
PSO Time in ACO Time in SPT Time in RR Time in
No. of VMs No. of Tasks Time in
seconds seconds seconds seconds
seconds
10 10 656 643 622 680 620
10 20 933 761 781 1006 691
10 30 1201 1110 1221 1290 730
20 20 332 312 319 350 302
20 30 512 496 520 602 422
20 40 716 680 722 812 512
20 50 944 912 1020 1220 512
30 40 537 490 632 712 420
30 60 680 610 734 880 540
30 80 790 688 940 1222 612
30 100 1117 971 1221 1337 622
40 80 511 416 580 662 380
40 100 810 765 879 1022 490
40 110 837 798 1021 1223 516
40 120 1109 1008 1330 1550 516
9
Figure 4. Makespan time of PSO, ACO, SPT, RR and ACO-SPT for 10VMs
10
with 40 VMs, ACO-SPT also takes the least time of 516 seconds as compared to the benchmarked
PSO with 1109, ACO 1008, SPT 1330 and RR with highest at 1550 seconds. This clearly shows
that ACO-SPT elimination of loops results to faster convergence, reduction in makespan time, hence
normalizing task processing.
5.2. Throughput
Throughput is the number of processes completed per unit time. The algorithms performance was
measured in form of throughput based on the measure of imbalance degree (∆) as can be seen
from equation 11.
11
Ω+σ
∆= (11)
∂
where:
Ω is the maximum execution time of task.

σ is the minimum execution time of task.
∂ is the average execution time of task.
From Figures 8-11, throughput time is shown on the y-axis while task range on the x-axis.
ACO-SPT achieves better system throughput to have finally settled on a time of 2.1 seconds
as compared to PSO, ACO, SPT and RR algorithms that kept fluctuating in their convergence. An
optimal time performance of full utilization of resources ensures a well-balanced load distribution
which suffices bandwidth consumption and further cost (Layla, 2017).
6. RELATED WORK AND DISCUSSION
Improving the quality of solution and convergence speed is nowadays the most fruitful research area
in cloud computing. These issues have been explored by researchers through the modification of
transition operator, hybridization in metaheuristic or preprocessing the input population (Tawfeek
et al., 2013). In (Mala and Sarbjeet, 2015), integrating two population-based metaheuristics with
dissimilar characteristics might likely delay the convergence time. The authors further argued that
there is higher chance of obtaining better solution result by hybridizing metaheuristic algorithms
with different search strategies. Based on this analysis of attaining efficient convergence speed,
integrating a deterministic with metaheuristics algorithm might improve its performance because
they have different characteristics which can leverage the strengths of each other. This section discus
Figure 8. Throughput of PSO, ACO, SPT, RR and ACO-SPT for 10vms
12
several related work reviews conducted by some authors on different approaches to dynamic resource
allocation techniques and further shows the analogy of summary.
Tawfeek et al. (2013) adopted the ACO algorithm for resources allocation in cloud. The authors
adopted makespan minimization as their objective function. The authors looked into the relative
strengths and weaknesses of the algorithm by experimentation where incoming batch jobs are assigned
to VM’s based on a simple, short-term memory using constraint satisfaction rule. Graph theorem
13
where PMs are represented with vertex (node) and edge defines VM migration from one PM to
another was used to model the system (Weihua et al., 2015; Zhe, 2014; Senthil and Venkatesan, 2015;
Zne-Jung and Chou-Yuan, 2006). The rule failed to address the issue of transition loops which causes
delay in convergence and longer time for couplings to be assigned (task and VM). Other makespan
minimization techniques studied include Heuristic Based load Balancing Algorithm (HBLBA) (Mainak
and Tarachand, 2017), Artificial Bee Colony (ABC) (Arunachalam and Amuthan (2018), grey wolf
algorithm (Gobalakrishnan and Arun, 2018), Fuzzy Modified Particle Swarm Optimization (FMPSO)
(Najme et al., 2019), Bacteria algorithm (Sobhanayak et al., 2018), Intelligent Water Drops (IWD)
(Sherma et al., 2018), Robust Heterogeneous Earliest Finishing Time (RHEFT) (Jyoti and Manpreet,
2017) and ACO (Guo, 2016; Harshitha and Beena, 2017; Ren and Juebo, 2015, Mohit et al., 2018;
Rajalakshmi et al., 2017; Shabeera et al., 2016). Looking into canvas to address ACO issues, other
authors make use of hybridization with GA (Chaharsooghi et al., 2008 and Weihua et al., 2015) and
Clonal selection algorithm (Jianbiao et al., 2014) to improve its search capability.
Deterministic techniques studied include Nayak et al. (2018) that uses sensitive deadline lease
mechanism in open nebula cloud form, Panda et al. (2018) with paired task scheduling to minimize
execution time and Arka et al. (2013) that proposed the hierarchical dominant resource fairness
(DRF) for scheduling resources. Rayon was proposed by Carlo et al. (2014) that works by integrating
reservation definition language (RDL) for permitting users reserve access to cluster resources and
mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) for planning current and future cluster resources. Other
deterministic techniques studied involve Stratos et al., (2017) that purported Justice; which uses
historical job execution logs and deadline information supplied with each job to implement admission
control and TetriSched by Alexey et al. (2016).
Table 2 provided the summary of review conducted where it can clearly be seen that most
authors failed to address the issue of transition loops which causes delay in convergence speed,
resulting to longer time for resources provisioning. As such, it is an overhead that leads to wastage
14
Table 2. Comparison of related work table
S/n Author(s) Method adopted Identified problem and new concept

Hybridized 2 population-based algorithms having
Zne-Jung and Chou- similar search characteristics. They might end
Heuristics hybrid search
Yuan (2006); Weihua up slowing down the convergence speed. A DA
algorithm method to ameliorate
1 et al. (2015); Senthil having stringent tight procedure, where paths and
performance through faster
and Venkatesan (2015); values of both the functions and design variables
search in resource allocation.
Jianbiao et al. (2014) are repeatable was used to obtain a fixed topology
structure.
Chaharsooghi et al.,
(2008); Tawfeek et al. The rule failed to address the issue of transition
A simple, short-term memory
(2013); Zhe (2014); loops which causes delay in convergence
using constraint satisfaction rule
2 Guo (2016); Jaya and and longer time of the assigned couplings.
to avoid multiple visits to a VM
Valarmathi (2017); Hybridization was used that avoided loops,
in one ACO procedure.
Anupama et al. (2017); promoted faster convergence.
Shabeera (2017)
Failed to provide a rule for recomputing dominant
By saturation, hierarchical DRF shares on nodes in the hierarchy (optimization). As
allocates tasks to open-source such, easily trapped in local minima. A rule based
3 Arka et al. (2013)
schedulers so as to mitigate for exploration and exploitation in search space
resource starvation. was used. Also, five states were used as at against
the 2 used by the authors.
Combined RDL and MILP
Follows a stringent deterministic rule that scale
for distribution of resources
less in optimizing cloud resources. An optimized
4 Carlo et al. (2014) between best-effort jobs and
technique that works on speeding convergence and
production jobs to minimize
execution time was adopted.
latency.
Mmax-min rules with forward- It did not strategize a rule for pheromone updates
backward ant mechanism to which can strategically reduce candidate nodes
5 Ren and Juebo (2015)
obtain a balanced distribution searching time. A rule for pheromone updates to
and coordination of tasks. strategize for faster convergence was used.
TetriSched make use of best Failed to address system convergence for the VMs.
6 Alexey et al. (2016) effort to minimize latency and ACO-SPT addresses convergence and makespan
maximize SLO time in reality that properly minimized latency.
It considered homogeneous VMs as cloud
Heuristic method that reduced resources are heterogeneous which causes
bandwidth usage and cross the resource utilization not being maximized;
network traffic by placing deteriorating the allocated VMs job completion
8 Shabeera et al. (2016)
required number of data in PMs time. Heterogeneous VMs was considered and
and VMs which are physically also a method that promotes faster convergence
closer. thereby saving additional bandwidth cost provided
promising result.
Uses historical job execution A static system that will not scale well with the
logs and deadline information dynamic and heterogeneous cloud environment. A
9 Stratos et al. (2017)
supplied with each job to dynamic system that can scale well provided good
control admission. quality result.
Uses shortest path method on
TSP method to provide global
Initial takeoff delay and presence of transition
search technique. As such,
Harshitha and Beena loops were not addressed. As such, took longer
10 minimizes delay in resources
(2017) time for the system to converge. Hybridization with
allocation to achieve green
spanning tree avoided transition loops.
computing through energy
conservation.
continued on following page
15
Table 2. Continued

Optimal VM placement
The VM placement used in this instance is
algorithm that periodically
not tested on real time environment; hence its
Rajalakshmi et al. monitors the response time of
12 efficiency and convergence speed cannot be
(2017) each CSP so as to reduce delay
justified. ACO-SPT efficiency was seen based on
in resource provisioning to
implementation on real time environment.
users.
Queing model and HBLBA They only considered task-VM mapping and server
to strategize based on coming configuration so as to minimize makespan and
Mainak and Trachand tasks and their sizes to balance load, but the authors failed to address the
13
(2017) configure servers leading to issue of heterogeneous resources and transition
makespan minimization and loops. ACO-SPT addressed transition loops for
tasks completion. faster convergence.
Approximates sets of task(s)
in ready queue by converting
The algorithm should have considered other swarm
sequential ranked task(s) into
Jyoti and Manpreet based and DA techniques in comparison that have
14 set of independent ranked tasks
(2017) addressed same parameters. Such system was
which demonstrates coherent
considered.
utilization against various
available levels of resources.
Their results prove to be effective in comparison
Threshold based trigger to
with traditional algorithms (FCFS, SJF, and
provide elasticity and design
MinMin) not heuristics optimization algorithms.
15 Mohit et al. (2018) an approach that is capable of
ACO-SPT efficiency was bench marked with
handling maximum user request
optimization algorithms and also scalable by
before jobs deadline.
adding more users.
Gap and current time
parameters were introduced
to schedule every lease. The Only 10 VM’s were considered and 55 leases.
technique solves the problems A rule that considered VM switching cost with
16 Nayak et al. (2018)
of resolving conflicts between large datasets of different tasks to facilitate
same leases to backfill and communication between VMs was used.
schedules sensitive deadline
during execution of tasks.
g groups and set of i task to a
The technique should be tested with large data sets
set of m cloud for minimizing
as of the small data sets that was used and should
overall layout time based on
17 Panda et al. (2018) be tested with real time cloud setup. ACO-SPT
unequal number of pairs of
was simulated and tested on real time cloud setup
tasks and cloud tasks for making
environment
scheduling decisions.
IWD that optimizes scheduling
Failed to provide a rule based optimization criteria
of workflow in cloud using
for handling the issue of transition loops. A rule
18 Sherma et al., (2018) realistic environment and
based for addressing transition loops provided
configurations of non-realistic
promising result.
configurations.
Left-skewed and right skewed The work only considered 2 QoS parameters;
Gobalakrishnan and datasets were used to improve energy and execution time. Other parameters like
19
Arun (2018) performance in makespan and load balancing, makespan time, convergence,
energy consumption. bandwidth, was considered.
continued on following page
16
Table 2. Continued

Uses mutation and crossover The work incurs extra timing for mutation,
GA technique for resource crossover, reproduction process and chemotaxis
Sobhanayak et al.
20 provisioning to minimize as such, slows down convergence. A system that
(2018)
makespan and energy eliminates transition loops which causes delay in
consumption. convergence reduced cost.
Opposition learning that
uses QoS characteristics and Our work considered other swarm-based
ArunaChalam and
21 traditional features to improve techniques in comparison to show its effectiveness
Amuthan (2018)
exploration and exploitation in and also non dependency of tasks.
swarm-based algorithms.
The authors failed to consider task precedence
A fitness calculation with fuzzy
and load balancing. Their algorithm also isn’t
inference system modifies
implemented in real cloud environment. A system
22 Najme et al. (2019) velocity updating methods for
that considered load balancing and task precedence
global search capability which
in real cloud environment provided promising
overcomes local optima of PSO.
result.
of resources (like time, CPU cycles, bandwidth and memory), hence degrades system performance
(Tawfeek et al., 2013; Shabeera et al., 2016; Mousavi and Fazekas, 2016). Addressing such issue
provided good quality result.
7. CONCLUSION
To achieve a well-balanced load, minimize bandwidth consumption and minimize makespan time;
ACO-SPT algorithm was developed which eliminated loops for faster algorithm convergence. The
system architecture component involves the datacenter broker which contains primary and secondary
controllers that determines how user jobs are moved in and out of the defined 5 VM path states. The
relative influence attached to the ACO probability distribution function defines ant movement thereby
ensuring loop transition. A total of 10 to 40 VMs receiving a range of 10-120 user tasks varying
of length from 20000-500000MI was evaluated. ACO-SPT recorded least makespan time based on
simulated results with a better system throughput that outperforms PSO, ACO, SPT and RR. As
such, it is more scalable to incorporate extra resources with a well-balanced load distribution. Future
work will look at the algorithm performance in a multi-tier environment that will contain more VMs,
energy efficiency and also compare the algorithm’s performance with other bio-inspired population-
based metaheuristic algorithms. Software Defined Network (SDN) will be used in our future work
to implement the ACO-SPT for it provides measure for administrator to prioritize and de-prioritize
with granular level of control, visible end-to-end manageability, and lowers operational cost.
17
REFERENCES
Adhikari, M., & Amgoth, T. (2018). Heuristic-based load-balancing algorithm for IaaS cloud. Future Generation
Computer Systems, 81, 156–165.
Alaya, I., Solnon, C., & Ghédira, K. (2004). Ant Algorithm for the Multi-Dimensional Knapsack Problem.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Bioinspired Optimization Methods and their Applications
(Bioma 2004). IEEE Press.
Albdour, L. (2017). Comparative Study for Different Provisioning Policies for Load Balancing in Cloudsim.
International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing, 7(3), 76–86. doi:10.4018/IJCAC.2017070104
Arunachalam, N., & Amuthan, A. (2018). Improved Cosine Similarity-based Artificial Bee Colony Optimization
scheme for reactive and dynamic service composition. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information
Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.jksuci.2018.10.003
Azad, P., & Navimipour, N. J. (2017). An energy-aware task scheduling in the cloud computing using a hybrid
cultural and ant colony optimization algorithm. International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing,
7(4), 20–40. doi:10.4018/IJCAC.2017100102
Balamurugan, B., Jayashree, S., & Divya, D. (2015). Bio-inspired Algorithms for Cloud Computing: A
Review. International Journal of Innovative Computing and Applications, 6(3/4), 181–202. doi:10.1504/
IJICA.2015.073007
Bhattacharya, A. A., Culler, D., Friedman, E., Ghodsi, A., Shenker, S., & Stoica, I. (2013, October). Hierarchical
scheduling for diverse datacenter workloads. Proceedings of the 4th annual Symposium on Cloud Computing
(p. 4). ACM. doi:10.1145/2523616.2523637
Chaharsooghi, S. K., & Kermani, A. H. M. (2008). An effective ant colony optimization algorithm (ACO) for
multi-objective resource allocation problem (MORAP). Applied Mathematics and Computation, 200(1), 167–177.
Curino, C., Difallah, D. E., Douglas, C., Krishnan, S., Ramakrishnan, R., & Rao, S. (2014, November).
Reservation-based scheduling: If you’re late don’t blame us! Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Cloud
Computing (pp. 1-14). ACM. doi:10.1145/2670979.2670981
Dimopoulos, S., Krintz, C., & Wolski, R. (2017, September). Justice: A deadline-aware, fair-share resource
allocator for implementing multi-analytics. Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Cluster
Computing (CLUSTER) (pp. 233-244). IEEE.
Doerr, B., Neumann, F., Sudholt, D., & Witt, C. (2011). Runtime analysis of the 1-ANT ant colony optimizer.
Theoretical Computer Science, 412(17), 1629–1644.
Dorigo, M., Birattari, M., & Stützle, T. (2006). Ant Colony Optimization, Artificial Ants as a Computational
Intelligence Technique. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine.
Elsherbiny, S., Eldaydamony, E., Alrahmawy, M., & Reyad, A. E. (2018). An extended Intelligent Water Drops
algorithm for workflow scheduling in cloud computing environment. Egyptian informatics journal, 19(1), 33-55.
Gao, R., & Wu, J. (2015). Dynamic load balancing strategy for cloud computing with ant colony optimization.
Future Internet, 7(4), 465–483.
Gao, Z. (2014, August). The allocation of cloud computing resources based on the improved Ant Colony
Algorithm. Proceedings of the 2014 Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Human-Machine Systems
and Cybernetics (Vol. 2, pp. 334-337). IEEE.
Guo, X. (2016). Ant Colony Optimization Computing Resource Allocation Algorithm Based on Cloud Computing
Environment. Proceedings of the International Conference on Education, Management, Computer and Society
(pp. 1039–1042). Atlantis press; . doi:10.2991/emcs-16.2016.256
Gutjahr, W. J. (2003). A Generalized Convergence Result for the Graph-Based Ant system. Probability in the
Engineering and Informational Sciences, 17(4), 545–569.
18
Gutjahr, W. J. (2008). First steps to the runtime complexity analysis of ant colony optimization. Computers &
Operations Research, 35(9), 2711–2727.
Harshitha, H. D., & Beena, B. M. (2017). Ant Colony Optimization for Efficient Resource Allocation in Cloud
Computing. International Journal on Recent and Innovation Trends in Computing and Communication, 5(6),
1232–1235.
Hu, W., Li, K., Xu, J., & Bao, Q. (2015, October). Cloud-computing-based resource allocation research on the
perspective of improved ant colony algorithm. Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Computer
Science and Mechanical Automation (CSMA) (pp. 76-80). IEEE.
Huang, Q., & Huang, T. (2010). An Optimistic Job Scheduling Strategy Based on QoS for Cloud Computing.
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Computing and Integrated Systems (pp. 20–23).
IEEE Press; . doi:10.1109/ICISS.2010.5655492
Jaya, S. P., & Valarmathi, R. (2017). Resource Allocation in Cloud IaaS Environment Based on Forming Coalition
using ACO. International Journal of Advanced Research in Basic Engineering Sciences and Technology, 3,
866–871.
Joshi, S., Bhatia, S., Raikar, K., & Pall, H. (2017). Customer experience and associated customer behaviour
in end user devices and technologies (smartphones, mobile internet, mobile financial services). International
Journal of High Performance Computing and Networking, 10(1-2), 118–126. doi:10.1504/IJHPCN.2017.083209
Kalra, M., & Singh, S. (2015). A review of metaheuristic scheduling techniques in cloud computing. Egyptian
informatics journal, 16(3), 275-295.
Kumar, M., Dubey, K., & Sharma, S. C. (2018). Elastic and flexible deadline constraint load Balancing algorithm
for Cloud Computing. Procedia Computer Science, 125, 717–724.
Lee, Z. J., & Lee, C. Y. (2005). A hybrid search algorithm with heuristics for resource allocation problem.
Information Sciences, 173(1-3), 155–167.
Lin, J., Zhong, Y., Lin, X., Lin, H., & Zeng, Q. (2014). Hybrid Ant Colony Algorithm Clonal Selection in the
Application of the Cloud’s Resource Scheduling.
Mansouri, N., Zade, B. M. H., & Javidi, M. M. (2019). Hybrid task scheduling strategy for cloud computing by
modified particle swarm optimization and fuzzy theory. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 130, 597–633.
Merkle, D., & Middendorf, M. (2002). Modeling the dynamics of ant colony optimization. Evolutionary
Computation, 10(3), 235–262.
Moorthy, R. S., Fareentaj, U., & Divya, T. K. (2017, August). An Effective Mechanism for Virtual Machine
Placement using Aco in IAAS Cloud. In IOP Conference Series (Vol. 225, No. 1). IOP Publishing.
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/225/1/012227
Mousavi, S. M., & Gábor, F. (2016). A novel algorithm for Load Balancing using HBA and ACO in Cloud
Computing environment. International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 14(6), 48.
Natesan, G., & Chokkalingam, A. (2019). Task scheduling in heterogeneous cloud environment using mean
grey wolf optimization algorithm. ICT Express, 5(2), 110–114.
Nayak, S. C., Parida, S., Tripathy, C., & Pattnaik, P. K. (2018). An enhanced deadline constraint based task
scheduling mechanism for cloud environment. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information
Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.jksuci.2018.10.009
Neumann, F., Sudholt, D., & Witt, C. (2008, September). Rigorous analyses for the combination of ant colony
optimization and local search. Proceedings of the International Conference on Ant Colony Optimization and
Swarm Intelligence (pp. 132-143). Springer.
Neumann, F., & Witt, C. (2006). Runtime Analysis of a Simple Ant Colony Optimization Algorithm. Proceedings
of the 17th International Conference Proceedings and on Algorithms Computation (ISAAC 06) (pp. 618–627).
Springer; . doi:10.1007/11940128_62
19
Neumann, F., & Witt, C. (2007, December). Ant colony optimization and the minimum spanning tree problem.
Proceedings of the International Conference on Learning and Intelligent Optimization (pp. 153-166). Springer.
Neumann, F., & Witt, C. (2009). Runtime analysis of a simple ant colony optimization algorithm. Algorithmica,
54(2), 243–255.
Orlin, J. B., Madduri, K., Subramani, K., & Williamson, M. (2010). A faster algorithm for the single source
shortest path problem with few distinct positive lengths. Journal of Discrete Algorithms, 8(2), 189–198.
Panahi, H., & Tavakkoli-Moghaddam, R. (2011). Solving a Multi-Objective Open Shop Scheduling Problem by
a Novel Hybrid Ant Colony Optimization. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(3), 2817–2822.
Panda, S. K., Nanda, S. S., & Bhoi, S. K. (2018). A pair-based task scheduling algorithm for cloud
computing environment. Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences. doi:10.1016/j.
jksuci.2018.10.001
Rainer, E. (2013). Quadratic Assignment Problems. In Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization (pp. 2741-
2814). Springer.
Senthil Kumar, A. M., & Venkatesan, M. (2015). An Efficient Multiple Object Resource Allocation Using Hybrid
GA-ACO Algorithm. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences Journal, 9(31), 53–59.
Shabeera, T. P., Kumar, S. M., Salam, S. M., & Krishnan, K. M. (2017). Optimizing VM allocation and data
placement for data-intensive applications in cloud using ACO metaheuristic algorithm. Engineering Science
and Technology, an International Journal, 20(2), 616-628. doi:10.1016/j.jestch.2016.11.006
Srichandan, S., Kumar, T. A., & Bibhudatta, S. (2018). Task scheduling for cloud computing using multi-objective
hybrid bacteria foraging algorithm. Future Computing and Informatics Journal, 3(2), 210–230.
Stützle, T., & Hoos, H. H. (2000). MAX–MIN ant system. Future Generation Computer Systems, 16(8), 889–914.
Sudholt, D. (2011). Using Markov-Chain Mixing Time Estimates for the Analysis of Ant Colony Optimization.
Proceedings of the 11th Workshop on Foundations of Genetic Algorithms (FOGA 2011) (pp. 139–150). ACM
Press; . doi:10.1145/1967654.1967667
Tawfeek, M. A., El-Sisi, A., Keshk, A. E., & Torkey, F. A. (2013, November). Cloud task scheduling based
on ant colony optimization. Proceedings of the 2013 8th international conference on computer engineering &
systems (ICCES) (pp. 64-69). IEEE.
Thaman, J., & Singh, M. (2017). Green cloud environment by using robust planning algorithm. Egyptian
Informatics Journal, 18(3), 205–214.
Tiwari, A., Richhariya, P., & Patra, S. (2017). Ant Colony Based Cloud VM Allocation and Placement Approach
for Resource Management in Cloud. IEEE International Journal of Computer Applications, 158(4), 8–12.
Tumanov, A., Zhu, T., Park, J. W., Kozuch, M. A., Harchol-Balter, M., & Ganger, G. R. (2016, April).
TetriSched: global rescheduling with adaptive plan-ahead in dynamic heterogeneous clusters. Proceedings
of the Eleventh European Conference on Computer Systems (p. 35). ACM. doi:10.1145/2901318.2901355
Vaquero, L. M., Cáceres, J., & Morán, D. (2011). The challenge of service level scalability for the cloud.
International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing, 1(1), 34–44. doi:10.4018/ijcac.2011010103
20
Muhammad Aliyu is a lecturer II in the computer science Department Federal polytechnic, Bauchi, Nigeria, having
obtained first and second degrees in computer science from Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University Bauchi, Nigeria.
Aliyu is a PhD research scholar undergoing a semester abroad program at SRM Institute of science and Technology,
Chennai, India. He is a certified CISCO instructor with area of interest on computer networks and communication,
cloud computing, IoT, wireless networks, network security, mobile computing and artificial intelligence and planning.
M.Murali has completed his M.Tech. degree from Manonmaniam Sundaranar University and PhD from SRM
University, Tamil Nadu, India. Currently, he is working as Associate Professor in Department of CSE, SRM Institute
of Science and Technology. He is having more than 20 years of teaching experience. His areas of research interest
are machine learning, Cloud computing and Internet of Things.
Abdulsalam Y. Gital is a Doctor of Computer Science from Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, Bauchi,
Nigeria, where he is currently involved in teaching, research and supervision of students both undergraduates
and postgraduates in computer science. He has a B-Tech, M.Sc. and PhD in Computer Science. His current
research areas are modeling and simulation, cloud computing, collaborative virtual environment and computer
communication, and networking.
Souley Boukari is a Professor of Computer Science from Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University, ATBU, Bauchi,
Nigeria, where he is currently involved in teaching, research and supervision of students both undergraduates
and postgraduates in computer science. He has a B-Tech, M.Sc. and PhD in Computer Science from ATBU.
His current research areas are data mining, machine learning, artificial intelligence, software engineering, cyber
security, and digital forensics.
21

10 4018@ijcac 2020040101

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10 4018@ijcac 2020040101

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Cloud Applications and Computing

Volume 10 • Issue 2 • April-June 2020

Efficient Metaheuristic Population-

3.1. Problem Formulation

1, if Ti is assigned for vmi

ET (i) is Execution Time

RTi = WTi - ETi (3)

WTi >= ETj (4)

3.2. System Architecture

Figure 1. Proposed ACO-SPT model diagram

3.2.1. Improved ACO Module

3.2.2. Initial Population

3.2.3. Improved SPT Module

Figure 2. Five VM path states

3.2.4. Hybridized ACO- SPT

3.3. Convergence Rate

Consider lim Makespan (t) = lim ∑Executiontimeoftask(Ti) (9)

Figure 3. ACO-SPT Algorithm

0, if , max ℜi, j ) < 1

4. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP AND RESULT

5. ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

5.1. Makespan Time

Table 1. Comparison of makespan

Ω is the maximum execution time of task.

6. RELATED WORK AND DISCUSSION

Figure 8. Throughput of PSO, ACO, SPT, RR and ACO-SPT for 10vms

Figure 9. Throughput of PSO, ACO, SPT, RR and ACO-SPT for 20vms

Table 2. Comparison of related work table

S/n Author(s) Method adopted Identified problem and new concept

continued on following page

S/n Author(s) Method adopted Identified problem and new concept

continued on following page

S/n Author(s) Method adopted Identified problem and new concept

You might also like

1, if Ti is assigned for vmi

Consider lim Makespan (t) = lim ∑Executiontimeoftask(Ti) (9)