Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2308.04436

The Two Faces of AI in Green Mobile Computing: A Literature Review

Wander Siemers·June Sallou·Luís Cruz
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Artificial intelligence is bringing ever new functionalities to the realm of mobile devices that are now considered essential (e.g., camera and voice assistants, recommender systems). Yet, operating artificial intelligence takes up a substantial amount of energy. However, artificial intelligence is also being used to enable more energy-efficient solutions for mobile systems. Hence, artificial intelligence has two faces in that regard, it is both a key enabler of desired (efficient) mobile functionalities and a major power draw on these devices, playing a part in both the solution and the problem. In this paper, we present a review of the literature of the past decade on the usage of artificial intelligence within the realm of green mobile computing. From the analysis of 34 papers, we highlight the emerging patterns and map the field into 13 main topics that are summarized in details. Our results showcase that the field is slowly increasing in the past years, more specifically, since 2019. Regarding the double impact AI has on the mobile energy consumption, the energy consumption of AI-based mobile systems is under-studied in comparison to the usage of AI for energy-efficient mobile computing, and we argue for more exploratory studies in that direction. We observe that although most studies are framed as solution papers (94%), the large majority do not make those solutions publicly available to the community. Moreover, we also show that most contributions are purely academic (28 out of 34 papers) and that we need to promote the involvement of the mobile software industry in this field.

Explore related subjects

cs.AIcs.CY

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Wander Siemers, June Sallou, Luís Cruz. 2023-07-21. The Two Faces of AI in Green Mobile Computing: A Literature Review. https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.04436

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗
arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗