Papers › QoS-Aware Resource Placement for LEO Satellite Edge Computing
QoS-Aware Resource Placement for LEO Satellite Edge Computing
Tobias Pfandzelter, David Bermbach
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.
With the advent of large LEO satellite communication networks to provide global broadband Internet access, interest in providing edge computing resources within LEO networks has emerged. The LEO Edge promises low-latency, high-bandwidth access to compute and storage resources for a global base of clients and IoT devices regardless of their geographical location. Current proposals assume compute resources or service replicas at every LEO satellite, which requires high upfront investments and can lead to over-provisioning. To implement and use the LEO Edge efficiently, methods for server and service placement are required that help select an optimal subset of satellites as server or service replica locations. In this paper, we show how the existing research on resource placement on a 2D torus can be applied to this problem by leveraging the unique topology of LEO satellite networks. Further, we extend the existing discrete resource placement methods to allow placement with QoS constraints. In simulation of proposed LEO satellite communication networks, we show how QoS depends on orbital parameters and that our proposed method can take these effects into account where the existing approach cannot.
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