Article Search
닫기

Original Article

Split Viewer

International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24(1): 30-42

Published online March 25, 2024

https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

© The Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems

A Novel Fuzzy Logic Based Operating System Scheduling Scheme

Abdul Kareem1 and Varuna Kumara2

1Department of Electronics and Communication, MIT Kundapura, Karnataka, India
2Department of AI & ML, MIT Kundapura, Karnataka, India

Correspondence to :
Varuna Kumara (vkumarg.24@gmail.com)

Received: April 18, 2022; Revised: October 21, 2023; Accepted: November 27, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

For a computer-based system, a set of processes must be scheduled such that every process is completed within its deadline. CPU scheduling is the process of allocating CPU among various processes in a multi-processing system. The decision to allocate the CPU to a process has to take into consideration all aspects, including its priority and execution time, as scheduling is guided by a number of factors other than the execution time or priority. It is no longer one-dimensional and has become a multidimensional problem with vagueness and uncertainties such as different CPU loading scenarios. The vagueness and uncertainties associated with the decision to allocate a CPU to a particular process can be addressed using a fuzzy logic approach. In this study, we propose a fuzzy logic-based algorithm for CPU scheduling. The proposed algorithm was compared with conventional scheduling algorithms for different CPU loading scenarios. The proposed method can schedule and execute all processes well within the deadline with a reduced average turn-around and a reduced average waiting time. From the comparison results, it is evident that the proposed algorithm outperforms conventional algorithms in terms of the average turn-around and waiting times.

Keywords: Fuzzy logic, Scheduling, Waiting time, Turn-around time

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Abdul Kareem holds a Doctor of Philosophy from St Peter’s Institute of Higher Education and Research, Chennai, India. He also received his B.Tech. and M. Tech from Kannur University, India in 2003 and Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi, India in 2008 respectively. He is currently Principal and a Professor at Electronics and Communication Engineering in Moodlakatte Institute of Technology, Kundapura, India. His research interests are in artificial intelligence, machine learning, control systems and microelectronics. He has published over 15 papers in international journals and conferences. He is a senior member of IEEE.

E-mail: afthabakareem@gmail.com.

Varuna Kumara is a research scholar in the Department of Electronics Engineering at JAIN (Deemed to be University), Bengaluru, India. He also received his B.E. and M.Tech. from Visvesvaraya Technological University, Belagavi, India in 2009 and 2012 respectively. He is currently assistant professor at Electronics and Communication Engineering in Moodlakatte Institute of Technology, Kundapura, India. His research interests are in artificial intelligence, signal processing, and control systems.

E-mail: vkumarg.24@gmail.com.

Article

Original Article

International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24(1): 30-42

Published online March 25, 2024 https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Copyright © The Korean Institute of Intelligent Systems.

A Novel Fuzzy Logic Based Operating System Scheduling Scheme

Abdul Kareem1 and Varuna Kumara2

1Department of Electronics and Communication, MIT Kundapura, Karnataka, India
2Department of AI & ML, MIT Kundapura, Karnataka, India

Correspondence to:Varuna Kumara (vkumarg.24@gmail.com)

Received: April 18, 2022; Revised: October 21, 2023; Accepted: November 27, 2023

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

For a computer-based system, a set of processes must be scheduled such that every process is completed within its deadline. CPU scheduling is the process of allocating CPU among various processes in a multi-processing system. The decision to allocate the CPU to a process has to take into consideration all aspects, including its priority and execution time, as scheduling is guided by a number of factors other than the execution time or priority. It is no longer one-dimensional and has become a multidimensional problem with vagueness and uncertainties such as different CPU loading scenarios. The vagueness and uncertainties associated with the decision to allocate a CPU to a particular process can be addressed using a fuzzy logic approach. In this study, we propose a fuzzy logic-based algorithm for CPU scheduling. The proposed algorithm was compared with conventional scheduling algorithms for different CPU loading scenarios. The proposed method can schedule and execute all processes well within the deadline with a reduced average turn-around and a reduced average waiting time. From the comparison results, it is evident that the proposed algorithm outperforms conventional algorithms in terms of the average turn-around and waiting times.

Keywords: Fuzzy logic, Scheduling, Waiting time, Turn-around time

Fig 1.

Figure 1.

Membership functions of “Execution time.”

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 2.

Figure 2.

Membership functions of “Process priority.”

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 3.

Figure 3.

Membership functions of “CPU allocation priority.”

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 4.

Figure 4.

Output variation as a function of input parameters.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 5.

Figure 5.

Fuzzy inference for “Priority = 0.5” and “Execution Time = 0.5.”

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 6.

Figure 6.

Variation of average waiting time for sample size of five processes.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 7.

Figure 7.

Variation of waiting time for sample size of 10 processes.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 8.

Figure 8.

Scheduled processes using RM policy.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 9.

Figure 9.

Scheduled processes using EDF algorithm

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 10.

Figure 10.

Scheduled processes using LLF algorithm

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 11.

Figure 11.

Scheduled processes using the proposed algorithm.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 12.

Figure 12.

Scheduling using RM algorithm.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 13.

Figure 13.

Scheduling using EDF algorithm.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 14.

Figure 14.

Scheduling using LLF algorithm.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 15.

Figure 15.

Scheduling using proposed fuzzy algorithm.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Fig 16.

Figure 16.

Variation of efficiency with loading factor.

The International Journal of Fuzzy Logic and Intelligent Systems 2024; 24: 30-42https://doi.org/10.5391/IJFIS.2024.24.1.30

Table 1 . Average waiting time for randomly generated 5 processes.

AlgorithmAverage waiting time (ms)
Case 1Case 2Case 3Case 4Case 5
FCFS16.217.220.223.610.4
SJF1410.81121.210.4
PS19.81623.42519.8
Proposed1711.212.623.412.6

Table 2 . Average waiting time for randomly generated 10 processes.

AlgorithmAverage waiting time (ms)
Case 1Case 2Case 3Case 4Case 5
FCFS72.384.250.862.675.8
SJF43.565.727.440.947
PS64.981.366.665.175.2
Proposed48.170.436.948.458.9

Table 3 . Average turn-around time for randomly generated 5 processes.

AlgorithmAverage turn-around time (ms)
Case 1Case 2Case 3Case 4Case 5
FCFS26.427.430.23720.4
SJF24.2212134.620.4
PS3026.233.438.429.8
Proposed27.221.422.636.822.6

Table 4 . Average turn-around time for randomly generated 10 processes.

AlgorithmAverage turn-around time (ms)
Case 1Case 2Case 3Case 4Case 5
FCFS87.1104.563.276.591.8
SJF58.38639.854.862.4
PS79.7101.6797990.6
Proposed62.990.749.362.374.3

Table 5 . Highly loaded system with loading factor of 0.98.

Process IDPeriodExecution time
P121
P251
P372

Table 6 . Overloaded system with loading factor of 1.33.

Process IDPeriodExecution time
P121
P241
P372
P4103

Table 7 . Overloaded system with loading factor of 1.125.

Process IDPeriodExecution time
P121
P241
P383

Table 8 . Observations for the processes in Table 7.

AlgorithmP1P2P3
RMExpected423
Scheduled422
Miss001

EDFExpected423
Scheduled422
Miss001

LLFExpected423
Scheduled422
Miss001

ProposedExpected423
Scheduled422
Miss001

Table 9 . Overloaded system with loading factor of 1.1875.

Process IDPeriodExecution time
P121
P241
P383
P4161

Table 10 . Observations for the processes in Table 9.

AlgorithmP1P2P3P4
RMExpected8461
Scheduled8440
Miss0021

EDFExpected8461
Scheduled8440
Miss0021

LLFExpected8461
Scheduled8350
Miss0111

ProposedExpected8461
Scheduled8431
Miss0030

Share this article on :

Related articles in IJFIS