Papers › Cosmos: A Cost Model for Serverless Workflows in the 3D Compute Continuum
Cosmos: A Cost Model for Serverless Workflows in the 3D Compute Continuum
Cynthia Marcelino, Sebastian Gollhofer-Berger, Thomas Pusztai, Stefan Nastic
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Due to the high scalability, infrastructure management, and pay-per-use pricing model, serverless computing has been adopted in a wide range of applications such as real-time data processing, IoT, and AI-related workflows. However, deploying serverless functions across dynamic and heterogeneous environments such as the 3D (Edge-Cloud-Space) Continuum introduces additional complexity. Each layer of the 3D Continuum shows different performance capabilities and costs according to workload characteristics. Cloud services alone often show significant differences in performance and pricing for similar functions, further complicating cost management. Additionally, serverless workflows consist of functions with diverse characteristics, requiring a granular understanding of performance and cost trade-offs across different infrastructure layers to be able to address them individually. In this paper, we present Cosmos, a cost- and a performance-cost-tradeoff model for serverless workflows that identifies key factors that affect cost changes across different workloads and cloud providers. We present a case study analyzing the main drivers that influence the costs of serverless workflows. We demonstrate how to classify the costs of serverless workflows in leading cloud providers AWS and GCP. Our results show that for data-intensive functions, data transfer and state management costs contribute to up to 75% of the costs in AWS and 52% in GCP. For compute-intensive functions such as AI inference, the cost results show that BaaS services are the largest cost driver, reaching up to 83% in AWS and 97% in GCP.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections