Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks on Latency and Energy Use | Blazingprojects Postgraduate Thesis
Home / Computer Science / Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks on Latency and Energy Use

Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks on Latency and Energy Use

 

Table Of Contents


Chapter ONE

INTRODUCTION

  • 1.1Introduction
  • 1.2Background of the Study
  • 1.3Statement of the Problem
  • 1.4Aim and Objectives of the Study
  • 1.5Research Questions
  • 1.6Research Hypotheses
  • 1.7Significance of the Study
  • 1.8Scope and Delimitation of the Study
  • 1.9Limitations of the Study
  • 1.10Organisation of the Study
  • 1.11Operational Definition of Terms

Chapter TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

  • 2.1Conceptual Review: Defining Edge AI Frameworks and Latency-Energy Trade-offs
  • 2.2Conceptual Review: Real-Time Inference in Edge Computing Environments
  • 2.3Conceptual Review: Hardware-Software Co-design in Edge AI
  • 2.4Theoretical Framework: Resource Allocation Theory in Embedded AI
  • 2.5Theoretical Framework: Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) Framework for Edge AI Adoption
  • 2.6Empirical Review: Comparative Studies of Edge AI Frameworks (TensorFlow Lite, PyTorch Mobile, OpenVINO, ONNX Runtime)
  • 2.7Empirical Review: Latency Measurement Methodologies in Edge Inference
  • 2.8Empirical Review: Energy Profiling Techniques for Edge Devices
  • 2.9Empirical Review: Model Optimization Techniques and Their Impact on Latency and Power
  • 2.10Empirical Review: Middleware and Communication Overheads in Edge AI Pipelines
  • 2.11Identified Gaps in the Literature
  • 2.12Conceptual Model or Summary of the Review

Chapter THREE

SYSTEM DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION

  • 3.1Research Design: Cross-Sectional Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks
  • 3.2Philosophical Paradigm: Pragmatism in Mixed Methods Evaluation
  • 3.3Population of the Study: Edge devices and AI frameworks in production-like environments
  • 3.4Sample Size and Sampling Technique: Stratified sampling across device classes and frameworks
  • 3.5Sources and Instruments of Data Collection: Benchmark suites, profiler tools, and hardware telemetry
  • 3.6Validity and Reliability of Instruments
  • 3.7Data Collection Procedures
  • 3.8Data Processing and Preprocessing
  • 3.9Method of Data Analysis
  • 3.10Model Specification or Analytical Framework
  • 3.11Ethical Considerations

Chapter FOUR

SYSTEM TESTING AND EVALUATION

  • ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS
  • 4.1Data Presentation: Inference Time and Energy Consumption Profiles per Framework
  • 4.2Descriptive Analysis: Baseline Hardware Characteristics and Software Configurations
  • 4.3Hypotheses Testing: Latency Differences Across Frameworks
  • 4.4Hypotheses Testing: Energy Use Differences Across Frameworks
  • 4.5Multivariate Analysis: Latency-Energy Trade-off Across Workloads
  • 4.6Sensitivity Analysis: Effect of Model Size and Quantization
  • 4.7Interpretation of Results: Correlation with Theoretical Frameworks
  • 4.8Discussion of Findings in Relation to Reviewed Literature

Chapter FIVE

SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

  • CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
  • 5.1Summary of Findings
  • 5.2Conclusion
  • 5.3Contribution to Knowledge
  • 5.4Practical Recommendations for Edge AI Practitioners
  • 5.5Recommendations for Further Studies

Thesis Abstract

Edge AI has emerged as a critical paradigm for deploying intelligent services with low latency and reduced cloud dependency. The study addresses the practical challenge of selecting appropriate edge AI frameworks by systematically comparing their performance in terms of latency and energy consumption under varying workload and hardware conditions. The aim is to provide evidence-based guidance for developers and researchers on framework choice, optimization opportunities, and deployment strategies for energy-constrained edge devices. Specific objectives are (1) to quantify and compare end-to-end latency across four widely adopted edge AI frameworks (TensorFlow Lite, PyTorch Mobile, ONNX Runtime, and Edge Impulse) on heterogeneous edge platforms; (2) to measure per-inference energy consumption and overall runtime energy profiles under CPU-only and heterogeneous accelerator configurations; (3) to analyze the sensitivity of latency and energy metrics to workload characteristics (model size, input resolution, batch size); (4) to identify framework-level and hardware-level optimization opportunities that yield the best latency-energy trade-offs; and (5) to develop a decision-support model integrating empirical results with a theoretical lens grounded in the resource-constrained mobile computing theory and the technology acceptance model for practitioner adoption. The methodology follows a mixed-methods research design combining experimental benchmarking and explanatory data analysis. The population comprises representative edge devices running contemporary autonomous inference workloads Raspberry Pi 4B with a 4-core ARM Cortex?A72, NVIDIA Jetson Nano, and Qualcomm Snapdragon 8c-based development board. A stratified sampling approach selects 20 configurations per framework, yielding a sample size of 80 experimental runs for strict comparability. Data collection instruments include calibrated power meters (WattsUp Pro) for precise per-inference energy measurements, high-resolution timers for latency capture (NTP-synchronized system clocks with 1 ms precision), and a standardized benchmark suite comprising image classification and object detection tasks using MobileNetV2, EfficientNet-lite, and tiny-YOLOv3. The study employs regression analysis and ANOVA to assess the effects of framework, hardware platform, model type, and input size on latency and energy, complemented by repeated-measures analysis where applicable. Validity and reliability are enhanced through pre-registered protocols, cross-validation of energy measurements, and inter-tool triangulation across hardware-instrument readings. Theoretical framing integrates the Shortest Path Theory of Edge Computing for latency modeling and the Energy-Delay Product (EDP) as a holistic efficiency metric, with reference to established theories such as the Resource-Based View for strategic framework selection and the Technology Acceptance Model to interpret practitioner adoption implications. Expected findings indicate that latency variability is dominated by framework overhead and hardware acceleration support, with ONNX Runtime and Edge Impulse showing favorable latency profiles on CPU-restricted devices, while TensorFlow Lite and PyTorch Mobile leverage hardware accelerators more effectively on Jetson Nano. Energy analyses are anticipated to reveal that tiny model configurations substantially reduce absolute energy per inference, yet larger models exhibit diminishing returns due to accelerator underutilization or suboptimal memory bandwidth, leading to non-linear energy-latency trade-offs. The interaction effects among framework, model, and hardware are expected to identify a subset of configurations that optimize the latency-energy envelope, informing a practical decision-support model for framework selection under given workload commitments and device constraints. The study contributes to knowledge by providing a rigorous, comparative, and context-aware evaluation of edge AI frameworks, integrating empirical benchmarking with theory-driven interpretation to elucidate how software frameworks interact with device heterogeneity to shape latency and energy outcomes. It offers actionable patterns and a decision-support framework that practitioners can employ to tailor edge inference deployments to specific application requirements, workloads, and energy budgets. The main conclusion envisaged is that no single framework universally outperforms others across all conditions; instead, optimal choices are contingent on the device platform, model complexity, and workload characteristics, underscoring the necessity of scenario-specific benchmarking. Recommendations include a framework-selection checklist for edge developers, guidelines for model optimization aligned with hardware accelerators, and avenues for future research to explore adaptive framework switching and dynamic energy-aware scheduling to sustain performance within tight power envelopes.

Thesis Overview

Edge AI refers to running artificial intelligence tasks directly on devices at the edge of the network (like smartphones, sensors, or local gateways) rather than sending data to distant servers. The research topic, Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks on Latency and Energy Use, asks how different software frameworks for edge AI perform in two critical dimensions: how fast they respond (latency) and how much power they consume (energy use) when executing common tasks such as image classification or sensor data inference. Why it matters: - In many real-world applications (industrial IoT, autonomous devices, smart cities), low latency and long device battery life are essential for reliability and user experience. - Framework choices influence whether an edge device can meet timing requirements and operate for longer periods between charges. - There is no single best framework; performance depends on hardware, model type, and workload, making systematic comparisons valuable for practitioners. What problem or knowledge gap it addresses: - While many edge AI frameworks exist (e.g., TensorFlow Lite, PyTorch Mobile, ONNX Runtime, and vendor-specific runtimes), comparative studies that measure both latency and energy across realistic workloads and devices are limited. - The study aims to fill this gap by providing a rigorous, side-by-side analysis under controlled conditions. What the researcher will do step by step: 1. Define a representative set of inference tasks (e.g., image classification, anomaly detection) and select common edge hardware (e.g., a smartphone, a single-board computer, and an industrial gateway). 2. Choose several widely used edge AI frameworks and ensure comparable model architectures across frameworks. 3. Design a reproducible test suite with standardized input data and load conditions. 4. Collect data on latency (end-to-end inference time) and energy use (battery drain or hardware power measurement) under varying workloads and temperatures. 5. Analyze data using statistical methods (ANOVA or regression) to compare framework performance across devices and tasks. 6. Validate findings with sensitivity analyses and discuss practical trade-offs. Expected contributions: - A practical benchmarking resource that guides developers in choosing suitable edge AI frameworks for latency-sensitive and energy-constrained deployments. - Insights into how hardware-software interactions influence performance, enabling more informed optimization strategies. Anticipated outcome: - Clear recommendations on which frameworks offer lower latency or better energy efficiency for specific tasks and devices, plus guidelines for optimizing models and runtimes for edge environments.

Blazingprojects Mobile App

📚 Over 50,000 Research Thesis
📱 100% Offline: No internet needed
📝 Over 98 Departments
🔍 Thesis-to-Journal Publication
🎓 Undergraduate/Postgraduate Thesis
📥 Instant Whatsapp/Email Delivery

Blazingprojects App

Related Research

English and Literary. 4 min read

Cross-Cultural Rewritings: Postcolonial Trauma in English-Language Adaptations...

Cross-Cultural Rewritings: Postcolonial Trauma in English-Language Adaptations is about how stories originating in postcolonial contexts are reimagined or rewri...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Electrical electroni. 2 min read

Comparative Analysis of Wireless Power Transfer in EV Charging Systems...

Wireless power transfer (WPT) for electric vehicle (EV) charging explores delivering electrical energy from a stationary source to a vehicle without physical co...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Economics. 3 min read

Comparative Analysis of Digital Payments and Economic Inclusion in Regions...

This research examines how digital payment systems influence economic inclusion across different regions by comparing where digital payments are widely adopted ...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Economics education. 2 min read

Comparative Assessment of Economic Literacy Across Public and Private Schools ...

This research investigates how economic literacy varies between students in public schools and those in private schools, focusing on knowledge, skills, and atti...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Dermatology. 4 min read

Comparative Analysis of Skincare Regimens on Post-Acne Scars Outcomes...

This thesis investigates how different skincare regimens influence the outcomes of post-acne scars, focusing on how people recover, their skin appearance, and p...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Dentistry. 2 min read

Comparative Analysis of Fluoride Varnish vs. Sealing Agents in Caries Prevention...

This research examines whether fluoride varnish or sealing agents are more effective for preventing dental caries, comparing their performance in a real-world c...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Computer Science. 4 min read

Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Frameworks on Latency and Energy Use...

Edge AI refers to running artificial intelligence tasks directly on devices at the edge of the network (like smartphones, sensors, or local gateways) rather tha...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Computer Engineering. 3 min read

Comparative Analysis of Edge AI Acceleration on Embedded Devices ...

Edge AI acceleration on embedded devices examines how artificial intelligence workloads, such as neural network inference, can be performed directly on small, l...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
Computer Education. 3 min read

Comparative Analysis of AI Tools in Computer Education Outcomes Across Regions...

This research investigates how artificial intelligence (AI) tools used in computer education influence learning outcomes in different regional contexts, and wha...

BP
Blazingprojects
Read more →
WhatsApp Click here to chat with us