pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.07046 · v1 · pith:ABO4DEKCnew · submitted 2026-06-05 · 💻 cs.DC

Predictive Autoscaling in Cloud-Native and Federated Cloud-Edge Computing Environments: A Taxonomy and Future Directions

Bablu Kumar , Anshul Verma , Rajkumar Buyya This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 21:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.DC
keywords predictive autoscalingcloud-native systemscloud-edge computingfederated learningKubernetes CRDsMAPE control loopsdrift-aware scalingtaxonomy
0
0 comments X

The pith

A taxonomy of predictive autoscaling techniques based on triggers, targets, models and metrics organizes advances for proactive scaling in cloud-edge systems.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper reviews how reactive threshold-based autoscaling often responds too late for dynamic workloads and heterogeneous cloud environments. It introduces a taxonomy that classifies techniques according to triggers, targets, prediction models and evaluation metrics. The review examines predictive approaches integrated with Kubernetes Custom Resource Definitions and MAPE control loops, along with strategies in federated learning that incorporate privacy preservation. It further analyses drift-aware methods that use feedback and stability controls for changing workloads. The resulting structure is positioned as a basis for more autonomous resource management across cloud-native and edge settings.

Core claim

The paper establishes that recent advances in predictive models, Kubernetes CRDs, MAPE-based control loops and federated learning have enabled proactive and autonomous autoscaling, and that a taxonomy organised by triggers, targets, prediction models and evaluation metrics supplies the foundation for next-generation intelligent predictive autoscaling in cloud-edge environments.

What carries the argument

The taxonomy of autoscaling techniques organised by triggers, targets, prediction models and evaluation metrics, which classifies existing approaches and highlights opportunities for proactive and privacy-aware mechanisms.

If this is right

  • Predictive models combined with MAPE loops shift scaling from reactive threshold responses to proactive adjustments that reduce resource imbalance.
  • CRD-based Kubernetes operators and reconciliation workflows allow custom, environment-specific autoscaling logic beyond default mechanisms.
  • Federated learning strategies enable scaling decisions while applying privacy-preserving techniques and container-level isolation.
  • Drift-aware methods that incorporate the Autoscaling Drift Index and feedback-driven correction improve stability under heterogeneous or changing workloads.
  • The outlined open challenges direct attention toward uncertainty-aware and fully autonomous scaling systems in federated cloud-edge settings.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The taxonomy categories could serve as a starting point for creating cross-platform benchmarks that compare scaling performance under controlled workload drifts.
  • Extending the dimensions to include energy-consumption metrics would connect the framework to sustainability goals in large-scale deployments.
  • Application of the same trigger-and-model classification to non-container orchestration systems might reveal whether the taxonomy generalises beyond Kubernetes-centric environments.

Load-bearing premise

The literature selected for the taxonomy and the chosen categorization dimensions accurately and comprehensively represent the current state of predictive autoscaling research and practice.

What would settle it

A new survey that identifies a large set of high-impact predictive autoscaling papers or deployments that fall outside the taxonomy categories would indicate that the classification does not provide a complete foundation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.07046 by Anshul Verma, Bablu Kumar, Rajkumar Buyya.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Systematic literature selection and filtering methodology for intelligent predictive autoscaling studies in cloud-native and federated cloud environments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Unified Intelligent predictive Autoscaling Framework for Cloud-Native and Federated Cloud-Edge Environments [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Proactive autoscaling roadmap from foundations to predictive, federated, and drift-aware control in cloud-edge systems. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Kubernetes autoscaling workflow showing metric flow from worker nodes to autoscalers and scaling actions via the API Server, Scheduler, and nodes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: MAPE loop showing how metrics flow through moni [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Enhanced MAPE-guided autoscaling architecture for cloud–edge and federated environments, showing workload flow and adaptive, privacy-aware [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Overview of the autoscaling taxonomy, illustrating the relationships among scaling triggers, scaling targets, prediction models, and evaluation dimensions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Predictive autoscaling pipeline integrating Informer and MV [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: End-to-end predictive autoscaling workflow integrating forecasting services, Kubernetes deployment, monitoring, CRD-based policy management, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Interactive workflow of predictive autoscaling for federated learning (FL) in cloud–edge environments using forecasting models, Kubernetes Operators, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: End-to-end FL autoscaling pipeline: forecasting-driven scaling via [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Drift-aware and uncertainty-aware autoscaling workflow for federated learning in cloud–edge environments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Drift-aware and uncertainty-aware autoscaling pipeline for federated [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Hierarchical taxonomy of challenges and future research directions in predictive autoscaling for cloud-native and federated cloud–edge environments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_14.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Autoscaling is a key capability in cloud-native systems, where dynamic workloads, heterogeneous environments, and latency-sensitive applications require efficient and adaptive resource management. Traditional reactive approaches based on fixed thresholds often respond too late, leading to resource imbalance, performance degradation, and unstable scaling behavior. Recent advances in predictive models, Kubernetes Custom Resource Definitions (CRDs), Monitor-Analyse-Plan-Execute (MAPE) based control loops, and federated learning (FL) have enabled more proactive and autonomous autoscaling strategies. This paper presents a structured review of these developments. It first introduces a taxonomy of autoscaling techniques based on triggers, targets, prediction models, and evaluation metrics. It then examines predictive autoscaling approaches and CRD-based mechanisms, including Kubernetes operators and reconciliation workflows. Further, it analyses autoscaling in federated learning environments, highlighting reactive and proactive strategies alongside privacy-preserving techniques and container-level isolation. The paper also discusses drift-aware and uncertainty-aware autoscaling, incorporating concepts such as the Autoscaling Drift Index (ADI), feedback-driven correction, and stability control for heterogeneous workloads. Finally, it outlines open challenges and future research directions, providing a foundation for next-generation intelligent predictive autoscaling in cloud-edge environments.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript is a structured literature survey that introduces a taxonomy of predictive autoscaling techniques in cloud-native and federated cloud-edge settings, organized along the dimensions of triggers, targets, prediction models, and evaluation metrics. It reviews predictive approaches, Kubernetes CRD-based mechanisms and reconciliation loops, MAPE control loops, federated-learning-aware autoscaling (including privacy and container isolation), and drift/uncertainty-aware methods that incorporate the Autoscaling Drift Index (ADI). The paper concludes by identifying open challenges and future directions for proactive, autonomous autoscaling.

Significance. A well-executed taxonomy in this area could help researchers navigate the intersection of predictive modeling, control theory, and federated systems for resource management. The explicit treatment of MAPE loops, CRDs, and drift detection is timely given the shift toward proactive strategies in heterogeneous environments. However, the significance is conditional on the taxonomy being grounded in a representative and reproducible selection of the literature.

major comments (2)
  1. [Introduction / Taxonomy construction] The manuscript provides no description of the literature-review methodology (search strings, databases, time window, or inclusion/exclusion criteria). Because the central claim is that the taxonomy supplies a foundation for next-generation work, the absence of selection criteria is load-bearing; without it, readers cannot judge whether the chosen dimensions and cited works accurately reflect the state of the art.
  2. [Drift-aware and uncertainty-aware autoscaling] In the drift-aware section the Autoscaling Drift Index (ADI) is introduced as a stability-control concept, yet no formal definition, formula, or worked example is supplied. This prevents assessment of whether ADI adds a falsifiable or operational contribution beyond existing drift-detection literature.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Taxonomy figures/tables] Figure captions and table headers could more explicitly link each entry to the taxonomy dimensions (triggers/targets/models/metrics) to improve traceability.
  2. [Related-work and taxonomy sections] Several citations appear only in passing; a consolidated summary table mapping each reference to the taxonomy categories would strengthen the synthesis.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to strengthen the manuscript's methodological transparency and the formalization of ADI.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Introduction / Taxonomy construction] The manuscript provides no description of the literature-review methodology (search strings, databases, time window, or inclusion/exclusion criteria). Because the central claim is that the taxonomy supplies a foundation for next-generation work, the absence of selection criteria is load-bearing; without it, readers cannot judge whether the chosen dimensions and cited works accurately reflect the state of the art.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of the review methodology is required for a taxonomy paper. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection (likely in Section 2 or the Introduction) that specifies the databases queried (IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital Library, SpringerLink, arXiv), the search strings, the time window, and the inclusion/exclusion criteria used to select the cited works. This addition will allow readers to assess the representativeness of the taxonomy. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Drift-aware and uncertainty-aware autoscaling] In the drift-aware section the Autoscaling Drift Index (ADI) is introduced as a stability-control concept, yet no formal definition, formula, or worked example is supplied. This prevents assessment of whether ADI adds a falsifiable or operational contribution beyond existing drift-detection literature.

    Authors: We acknowledge the omission. The revised version will expand the drift-aware section with (i) a formal definition of ADI, (ii) its mathematical formula, and (iii) a concrete worked example showing its computation and application to a heterogeneous workload scenario. This will clarify its operational value relative to prior drift-detection techniques. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

This is a literature survey paper that presents a taxonomy of existing predictive autoscaling techniques organized by triggers, targets, prediction models, and metrics, along with reviews of Kubernetes CRDs, MAPE loops, federated learning applications, and drift-aware methods. No new derivations, equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or uniqueness theorems are introduced; the central claim is that recent advances enable proactive strategies and the taxonomy provides a foundation, which rests on the representativeness of selected literature rather than any internal reduction to fitted inputs or self-citations. The work contains no load-bearing steps that equate outputs to inputs by construction, making the derivation chain self-contained as a review.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a survey the central contribution rests on the authors' selection and categorization of prior work together with standard domain assumptions about cloud workload variability.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Dynamic workloads, heterogeneous environments, and latency-sensitive applications in cloud-native systems require adaptive rather than purely reactive resource management.
    Invoked in the opening paragraph to motivate the shift to predictive techniques.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5752 in / 1160 out tokens · 20832 ms · 2026-06-27T21:04:09.448571+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

164 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Auto-scaling mechanisms in serverless computing: A comprehensive review,

    M. Tari, M. Ghobaei-Arani, J. Pouramini, and M. Ghorbian, “Auto-scaling mechanisms in serverless computing: A comprehensive review,”Computer Science Review, vol. 53, p. 100650, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ S1574013724000340

    2024

  2. [2]

    The comput- ing continuum: Past, present, and future,

    L. F. Bittencourt, R. Rodrigues-Filho, J. Spillner, F. De Turck, J. Santos, N. L. da Fonseca, O. Rana, M. Parashar, and I. Foster, “The comput- ing continuum: Past, present, and future,”Computer Science Review, vol. 58, p. 100782, 2025

    2025

  3. [3]

    Con- tainerized microservices: A survey of resource management frame- works,

    L. M. Al Qassem, T. Stouraitis, E. Damiani, and I. M. Elfadel, “Con- tainerized microservices: A survey of resource management frame- works,”IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 3775–3796, 2024

    2024

  4. [5]

    Migrating towards mi- croservice architectures: an industrial survey,

    P. Di Francesco, P. Lago, and I. Malavolta, “Migrating towards mi- croservice architectures: an industrial survey,” in2018 IEEE interna- tional conference on software architecture (ICSA). IEEE, 2018, pp. 29–2909

    2018

  5. [6]

    Cloud-native computing: A survey from the perspective of services,

    S. Deng, H. Zhao, B. Huang, C. Zhang, F. Chen, Y . Deng, J. Yin, S. Dustdar, and A. Y . Zomaya, “Cloud-native computing: A survey from the perspective of services,”Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 112, no. 1, pp. 12–46, 2024

    2024

  6. [7]

    Overview — kubernetes.io,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Overview — kubernetes.io,” https://kubernetes. io/docs/concepts/overview/, [Accessed 09-12-2025]

    2025

  7. [8]

    Critical insights into runtime scheduling, image, storage, and networking challenges in modern ku- bernetes environments,

    B. Kumar, A. Verma, and P. Verma, “Critical insights into runtime scheduling, image, storage, and networking challenges in modern ku- bernetes environments,”Computer Science Review, vol. 59, p. 100851, 2026

    2026

  8. [9]

    Autoscaling techniques in cloud-native com- puting: A comprehensive survey,

    B. Jeong and Y .-S. Jeong, “Autoscaling techniques in cloud-native com- puting: A comprehensive survey,”Computer Science Review, vol. 58, p. 100791, 2025

    2025

  9. [10]

    Tools for Monitoring Resources — kubernetes.io,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Tools for Monitoring Resources — kubernetes.io,” https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/debug/debug-cluster/ resource-usage-monitoring/, [Accessed 09-12-2025]. 36

    2025

  10. [11]

    Offloading using traditional optimization and machine learning in federated cloud–edge–fog sys- tems: A survey,

    B. Kar, W. Yahya, Y .-D. Lin, and A. Ali, “Offloading using traditional optimization and machine learning in federated cloud–edge–fog sys- tems: A survey,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 1199–1226, 2023

    2023

  11. [12]

    Ai-empowered fog/edge resource management for iot applications: A comprehensive review, research challenges, and future perspectives,

    G. K. Walia, M. Kumar, and S. S. Gill, “Ai-empowered fog/edge resource management for iot applications: A comprehensive review, research challenges, and future perspectives,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 619–669, 2024

    2024

  12. [13]

    Energy-efficient and latency-aware task offloading for industrial cloud-edge systems with heterogeneous cpus and gpus,

    J. Zhai, J. Bi, H. Yuan, J. Zhang, and R. Buyya, “Energy-efficient and latency-aware task offloading for industrial cloud-edge systems with heterogeneous cpus and gpus,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2025

    2025

  13. [14]

    Efficient orchestration of distributed workloads in multi-region kubernetes cluster,

    R. Furnadzhiev, M. Shopov, and N. Kakanakov, “Efficient orchestration of distributed workloads in multi-region kubernetes cluster,”Comput- ers, vol. 14, no. 4, p. 114, 2025

    2025

  14. [15]

    Autoscaling Workloads — kubernetes.io,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Autoscaling Workloads — kubernetes.io,” https: //kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/autoscaling/, [Accessed 09- 12-2025]

    2025

  15. [16]

    Optimizing resource allocation using proactive scaling with predictive models and custom resources,

    B. Kumar, A. Verma, and P. Verma, “Optimizing resource allocation using proactive scaling with predictive models and custom resources,” Computers and Electrical Engineering, vol. 118, p. 109419, 2024

    2024

  16. [17]

    Optimizing resource allocation in cloud-native applications through proactive autoscaling with the informerautoscale model,

    B. Kumar, A. Verma, P. Verma, and A. Bennour, “Optimizing resource allocation in cloud-native applications through proactive autoscaling with the informerautoscale model,”The Journal of Supercomputing, vol. 81, no. 9, p. 1077, 2025

    2025

  17. [18]

    Properties of horizontal pod autoscaling algorithms and application for scaling cloud-native network functions,

    T. Van Do, N. H. Do, C. Rotter, T. Lakshman, C. Biro, and T. B ´erczes, “Properties of horizontal pod autoscaling algorithms and application for scaling cloud-native network functions,”IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 2025

    2025

  18. [19]

    Horizontal pod autoscaler documentation,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Horizontal pod autoscaler documentation,” https: //kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/run-application/horizontal-pod-autoscale/, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-20

    2023

  19. [20]

    Elastic federated learning with kubernetes vertical pod autoscaler for edge computing,

    K. Q. Pham and T. Kim, “Elastic federated learning with kubernetes vertical pod autoscaler for edge computing,”Future Generation Com- puter Systems, vol. 158, pp. 501–515, 2024

    2024

  20. [21]

    Kubernetes scheduling: Taxonomy, ongoing issues and challenges,

    C. Carri ´on, “Kubernetes scheduling: Taxonomy, ongoing issues and challenges,”ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 55, no. 7, pp. 1–37, 2022

    2022

  21. [22]

    Edge resource autoscaling for hierarchical federated learning over public edge platforms,

    M. Zhao, K. Zhao, Z. Zhou, and X. Chen, “Edge resource autoscaling for hierarchical federated learning over public edge platforms,” in2022 IEEE Smartworld, Ubiquitous Intelligence & Computing, Scalable Computing & Communications, Digital Twin, Privacy Computing, Metaverse, Autonomous & Trusted Vehicles (SmartWorld/UIC/Scal- Com/DigitalTwin/PriComp/Meta). ...

    2022

  22. [23]

    Federated learning in mobile edge networks: A comprehensive survey,

    W. Y . B. Lim, N. C. Luong, D. T. Hoang, Y . Jiao, Y .-C. Liang, Q. Yang, D. Niyato, and C. Miao, “Federated learning in mobile edge networks: A comprehensive survey,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 2031–2063, 2020

    2031

  23. [24]

    Data- driven participant selection and bandwidth allocation for heterogeneous federated edge learning,

    A. Albaseer, M. Abdallah, A. Al-Fuqaha, and A. Erbad, “Data- driven participant selection and bandwidth allocation for heterogeneous federated edge learning,”IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, vol. 53, no. 9, pp. 5848–5860, 2023

    2023

  24. [25]

    Fedalora: Adaptive local lora aggregation for personalized federated learning in llm,

    X. Yi, C. Hu, and B. Cai, “Fedalora: Adaptive local lora aggregation for personalized federated learning in llm,” inInternational Conference on Wireless Artificial Intelligent Computing Systems and Applications. Springer, 2025, pp. 86–95

    2025

  25. [26]

    Fedinv: A semi-asynchronous federated learning framework with dynamic aggregation for privacy-preserving industrial energy forecasting,

    B. Liu, P. Xia, and S. Xu, “Fedinv: A semi-asynchronous federated learning framework with dynamic aggregation for privacy-preserving industrial energy forecasting,” in2025 IEEE/CIC International Con- ference on Communications in China (ICCC). IEEE, 2025, pp. 1–6

    2025

  26. [27]

    Proactive auto-scaling technique for web applications in container-based edge computing using federated learning model,

    J. Dogani and F. Khunjush, “Proactive auto-scaling technique for web applications in container-based edge computing using federated learning model,”Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, vol. 187, p. 104837, 2024

    2024

  27. [28]

    Openfedllm: Training large language models on decentral- ized private data via federated learning,

    R. Ye, W. Wang, J. Chai, D. Li, Z. Li, Y . Xu, Y . Du, Y . Wang, and S. Chen, “Openfedllm: Training large language models on decentral- ized private data via federated learning,” inProceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, 2024, pp. 6137–6147

    2024

  28. [29]

    A multivariate transformer- based monitor-analyze-plan-execute (mape) autoscaling framework for dynamic resource allocation in cloud environment,

    B. Kumar, A. Verma, and P. Verma, “A multivariate transformer- based monitor-analyze-plan-execute (mape) autoscaling framework for dynamic resource allocation in cloud environment,”Computing, vol. 107, no. 3, p. 69, 2025

    2025

  29. [30]

    Edge-cloud collaborative com- puting on distributed intelligence and model optimization: A survey,

    J. Liu, Y . Du, K. Yang, J. Wu, Y . Wang, X. Hu, Z. Wang, Y . Liu, P. Sun, A. Boukerche, and V . C. M. Leung, “Edge-cloud collaborative com- puting on distributed intelligence and model optimization: A survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 28, pp. 5049–5080, 2026

    2026

  30. [31]

    A survey on approximate edge ai for energy efficient autonomous driving services,

    D. Katare, D. Perino, J. Nurmi, M. Warnier, M. Janssen, and A. Y . Ding, “A survey on approximate edge ai for energy efficient autonomous driving services,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 2714–2754, 2023

    2023

  31. [32]

    Auto-scaling web applications in clouds: A taxonomy and survey,

    C. Qu, R. N. Calheiros, and R. Buyya, “Auto-scaling web applications in clouds: A taxonomy and survey,”ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 1–33, 2018

    2018

  32. [33]

    Reinforcement learning-based application autoscaling in the cloud: A survey,

    Y . Gar ´ı, D. A. Monge, E. Pacini, C. Mateos, and C. G. Garino, “Reinforcement learning-based application autoscaling in the cloud: A survey,”Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, vol. 102, p. 104288, 2021

    2021

  33. [34]

    Prediction-based scheduling techniques for cloud data center’s workload: a systematic review,

    S. Kashyap and A. Singh, “Prediction-based scheduling techniques for cloud data center’s workload: a systematic review,”Cluster Computing, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 3209–3235, 2023

    2023

  34. [35]

    Deep learning and feedback control based container auto-scaling for cloud native micro- services,

    Z. Cai, H. Wu, X. Jiang, X. Li, and R. Buyya, “Deep learning and feedback control based container auto-scaling for cloud native micro- services,”IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 2025

    2025

  35. [36]

    Catscaler: A convolution-augmented transformer scaling framework for cloud-native applications,

    F. Meng, H. Dai, G. Cong, B. Zhu, and H. Zhao, “Catscaler: A convolution-augmented transformer scaling framework for cloud-native applications,”IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, 2025

    2025

  36. [37]

    Auto-scaling techniques for iot-based cloud applications: a review,

    S. Verma and A. Bala, “Auto-scaling techniques for iot-based cloud applications: a review,”Cluster Computing, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 2425– 2459, 2021

    2021

  37. [38]

    K-agrued: A container autoscaling technique for cloud-based web applications in kubernetes using attention-based gru encoder-decoder,

    J. Dogani, F. Khunjush, and M. Seydali, “K-agrued: A container autoscaling technique for cloud-based web applications in kubernetes using attention-based gru encoder-decoder,”Journal of Grid Comput- ing, vol. 20, no. 4, p. 40, 2022

    2022

  38. [39]

    A holistic view on re- source management in serverless computing environments: Taxonomy and future directions,

    A. Mampage, S. Karunasekera, and R. Buyya, “A holistic view on re- source management in serverless computing environments: Taxonomy and future directions,”ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 54, no. 11s, pp. 1–36, 2022

    2022

  39. [40]

    Auto- scaling mechanisms in serverless computing: A comprehensive review,

    M. Tari, M. Ghobaei-Arani, J. Pouramini, and M. Ghorbian, “Auto- scaling mechanisms in serverless computing: A comprehensive review,” Computer Science Review, vol. 53, p. 100650, 2024

    2024

  40. [41]

    Predictive dynamic virtual machine scaling for federated learning over edge-cloud interworking,

    S. Patni, S. Woo, and J. Lee, “Predictive dynamic virtual machine scaling for federated learning over edge-cloud interworking,”IT Pro- fessional, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 35–44, 2025

    2025

  41. [42]

    Federated learning in cloud-edge-fog architectures: Enhancing privacy, efficiency, and scalability,

    Z. J. KhalilAbadi, N. Mansouri, and M. M. Javidi, “Federated learning in cloud-edge-fog architectures: Enhancing privacy, efficiency, and scalability,”Computer Science Review, vol. 60, p. 100917, 2026

    2026

  42. [43]

    Decentralized federated learning with non-iid data: Challenges, trends, and future opportunities,

    W.-C. Chung, C.-A. Lo, Y .-H. Lin, Z.-H. Chen, and C.-L. Hung, “Decentralized federated learning with non-iid data: Challenges, trends, and future opportunities,”ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 58, no. 8, pp. 1–41, 2026

    2026

  43. [44]

    Federated learning in iot environments: Examining the three-way see-saw for privacy, model-performance, and network-efficiency,

    R. Laidi, N. Merabtine, D. Djenouri, S. Latif, H. A. Qadir, Y . Dje- nouri, and I. Balasingham, “Federated learning in iot environments: Examining the three-way see-saw for privacy, model-performance, and network-efficiency,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 28, pp. 1025–1058, 2026

    2026

  44. [45]

    Advances and open challenges in federated foundation models,

    C. Ren, H. Yu, H. Peng, X. Tang, B. Zhao, L. Yi, A. Z. Tan, Y . Gao, A. Li, X. Li, Z. Li, and Q. Yang, “Advances and open challenges in federated foundation models,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 28, pp. 2087–2126, 2026

    2087

  45. [46]

    A survey on federated analytics: Taxonomy, enabling techniques, applications and open issues,

    Z. Wang, H. Ji, Y . Zhu, D. Wang, and Z. Han, “A survey on federated analytics: Taxonomy, enabling techniques, applications and open issues,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 28, pp. 2457–2496, 2026

    2026

  46. [47]

    A survey on the placement of virtual re- sources and virtual network functions,

    A. Laghrissi and T. Taleb, “A survey on the placement of virtual re- sources and virtual network functions,”IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 1409–1434, 2019

    2019

  47. [48]

    Cloud-native applications,

    D. Gannon, R. Barga, and N. Sundaresan, “Cloud-native applications,” IEEE Cloud Computing, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 16–21, 2017

    2017

  48. [49]

    Self-adaptive trade-off decision making for autoscaling cloud-based services,

    T. Chen and R. Bahsoon, “Self-adaptive trade-off decision making for autoscaling cloud-based services,”IEEE Transactions on Services Computing, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 618–632, 2015

    2015

  49. [50]

    Optimal cloudlet selection in edge computing for resource allocation,

    B. Kumar, M. Singh, A. Verma, and P. Verma, “Optimal cloudlet selection in edge computing for resource allocation,”SN Computer Science, vol. 4, no. 6, p. 745, 2023

    2023

  50. [51]

    Borg, omega, and kubernetes,

    B. Burns, B. Grant, D. Oppenheimer, E. Brewer, and J. Wilkes, “Borg, omega, and kubernetes,”Communications of the ACM, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 50–57, 2016

    2016

  51. [52]

    Containers and cloud: From lxc to docker to kubernetes,

    D. Bernstein, “Containers and cloud: From lxc to docker to kubernetes,” IEEE Cloud Computing, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 81–84, 2014

    2014

  52. [53]

    Kubernetes architecture documentation,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Kubernetes architecture documentation,” https: //kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/, 2024, accessed: 2024-12-01. 37

    2024

  53. [54]

    Kubernetes scaling: A com- prehensive review of scalability in kubernetes,

    T. S. Wijesekera and D. R. Wijendra, “Kubernetes scaling: A com- prehensive review of scalability in kubernetes,” inInternational Con- ference on ICT for Sustainable Development. Springer, 2025, pp. 187–201

    2025

  54. [55]

    Kcss: Kubernetes container scheduling strategy

    T. Menouer, “Kcss: Kubernetes container scheduling strategy.”Journal of Supercomputing, vol. 77, no. 5, 2021

    2021

  55. [56]

    A formal model of the kubernetes container framework,

    G. Turin, A. Borgarelli, S. Donetti, E. B. Johnsen, S. L. Tapia Tar- ifa, and F. Damiani, “A formal model of the kubernetes container framework,” inInternational Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods. Springer, 2020, pp. 558–577

    2020

  56. [57]

    Large-scale cluster management at google with borg,

    A. Verma, L. Pedrosa, M. R. Korupolu, D. Oppenheimer, E. Tune, and J. Wilkes, “Large-scale cluster management at google with borg,” in Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Computer Systems (EuroSys). ACM, 2015, pp. 1–17

    2015

  57. [58]

    Hightower, B

    K. Hightower, B. Burns, and J. Beda,Kubernetes: Up and Running. O’Reilly Media, 2017

    2017

  58. [59]

    Kubernetes api concepts and object documen- tation,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Kubernetes api concepts and object documen- tation,” https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/, 2023, accessed: 2023-11- 20

    2023

  59. [60]

    Horizontal pod autoscaling in kubernetes for elastic container orchestration,

    T.-T. Nguyen, Y .-J. Yeom, T. Kim, D.-H. Park, and S. Kim, “Horizontal pod autoscaling in kubernetes for elastic container orchestration,” Sensors, vol. 20, no. 16, p. 4621, 2020

    2020

  60. [61]

    Vertical pod autoscaler documentation,

    Kubernetes-Authors, “Vertical pod autoscaler documentation,” https: //github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/vertical-pod-autoscaler, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-20

    2023

  61. [62]

    Kubernetes cluster autoscaler documentation,

    KubernetesAuthors, “Kubernetes cluster autoscaler documentation,” https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/tree/master/cluster-autoscaler, 2023, accessed: 2023-11-20

    2023

  62. [63]

    Maestro: An autonomic controller for cloud resource management,

    D. Villegas, G. Casaleet al., “Maestro: An autonomic controller for cloud resource management,” inIEEE/ACM CCGrid, 2012

    2012

  63. [64]

    A review of auto-scaling techniques for elastic applications in cloud environments,

    T. Lorido-Botranet al., “A review of auto-scaling techniques for elastic applications in cloud environments,”Journal of Grid Computing, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 559–592, 2014

    2014

  64. [65]

    Machine learning-based resource manage- ment for cloud computing environments,

    M. Ghobaei-Araniet al., “Machine learning-based resource manage- ment for cloud computing environments,”Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2020

    2020

  65. [66]

    Intelligent auto- scaling in hybrid and multi-cloud architectures using reinforcement learning,

    A. Kakkad, C. Shinadiya, M. Singh, and N. S. Kumar, “Intelligent auto- scaling in hybrid and multi-cloud architectures using reinforcement learning,” in2025 Seventh International Conference on Computational Intelligence andCommunication Technologies (CCICT). IEEE, 2025, pp. 776–781

    2025

  66. [67]

    Predictive hybrid autoscaling for containerized applications,

    D.-D. Vu, M.-N. Tran, and Y . Kim, “Predictive hybrid autoscaling for containerized applications,”IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 109 768–109 778, 2022

    2022

  67. [68]

    An optimal three-tier prioritization- based multiflow scheduling in cloud-assisted smart healthcare,

    Sarthak, A. Verma, and P. Verma, “An optimal three-tier prioritization- based multiflow scheduling in cloud-assisted smart healthcare,”Journal of Network and Computer Applications, vol. 238, p. 104143, 2025

    2025

  68. [69]

    Autoscaling of microservice resources based on dense connectivity spatio-temporal gnn and q- learning,

    P. Liang, Y . Xun, J. Cai, and H. Yang, “Autoscaling of microservice resources based on dense connectivity spatio-temporal gnn and q- learning,”Future Generation Computer Systems, vol. 174, p. 107909, 2026

    2026

  69. [70]

    Auto-scaling techniques in cloud computing: Issues and research directions,

    S. Alharthi, A. Alshamsi, A. Alseiari, and A. Alwarafy, “Auto-scaling techniques in cloud computing: Issues and research directions,”Sen- sors, vol. 24, no. 17, p. 5551, 2024

    2024

  70. [71]

    Global microservice autoscaling over heterogeneous edge environments for in- ternet applications: A reinforcement learning approach,

    K. Peng, J. Rao, H. Li, Y . Hu, B. Jin, T. Zheng, and M. Hu, “Global microservice autoscaling over heterogeneous edge environments for in- ternet applications: A reinforcement learning approach,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2025

    2025

  71. [72]

    Kubernetes advanced auto scaling techniques,

    R. Molleti, “Kubernetes advanced auto scaling techniques,”Journal of Mathematical & Computer Applications, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 1–7, 2022

    2022

  72. [73]

    A comprehensive review on automatic fruit sorting and grading techniques with emphasis on weight-based classification,

    D. Waghmare, A. Mulani, S. Takale, V . Godase, and A. Mulani, “A comprehensive review on automatic fruit sorting and grading techniques with emphasis on weight-based classification,”Research & Review: Electronics and Communication Engineering, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 1–10, 2025

    2025

  73. [74]

    As-threshold method to perform horizontal auto-scaling in a cloud computing environment,

    A. Archana and N. Kumar, “As-threshold method to perform horizontal auto-scaling in a cloud computing environment,”Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience, vol. 37, no. 12-14, p. e70135, 2025

    2025

  74. [75]

    Investigation into auto-scaling mechanisms in cloud computing,

    X. Li, J. Dong, W. Xiang, D. Zhao, L. Xu, and F. Tong, “Investigation into auto-scaling mechanisms in cloud computing,” inInternational Conference on Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management. Springer, 2025, pp. 198–209

    2025

  75. [76]

    Serverless event-driven architecture for enterprise test automation vamsi krishna gattupall

    V . K. Gattupalli, “Serverless event-driven architecture for enterprise test automation vamsi krishna gattupall.”Journal of Computational Analysis & Applications, vol. 34, no. 11, 2025

    2025

  76. [77]

    Enhancing cloud resource utilization with predictive autoscaling using transformer models,

    R. Shrestha and F. T. Sabiha, “Enhancing cloud resource utilization with predictive autoscaling using transformer models,” in2025 9th In- ternational Conference on Cloud and Big Data Computing (ICCBDC). IEEE, 2025, pp. 24–29

    2025

  77. [78]

    An efficient multivariate autoscaling framework using bi-lstm for cloud computing,

    N.-M. Dang-Quang and M. Yoo, “An efficient multivariate autoscaling framework using bi-lstm for cloud computing,”Applied sciences, vol. 12, no. 7, p. 3523, 2022

    2022

  78. [79]

    A review on prediction based autoscaling techniques for heterogeneous applications in cloud environ- ment,

    E. Radhika and G. S. Sadasivam, “A review on prediction based autoscaling techniques for heterogeneous applications in cloud environ- ment,”Materials Today: Proceedings, vol. 45, pp. 2793–2800, 2021

    2021

  79. [80]

    Intelligent autoscaling of microservices in the cloud for real-time applications,

    A. A. Khaleq and I. Ra, “Intelligent autoscaling of microservices in the cloud for real-time applications,”IEEE access, vol. 9, pp. 35 464– 35 476, 2021

    2021

  80. [81]

    Comparing neural and statistical time-series models for proactive auto-scaling in kubernetes,

    J. W. Fog, J. J. T. Møller, T. M. Jensen, D. Taibi, and M. Albano, “Comparing neural and statistical time-series models for proactive auto-scaling in kubernetes,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Service-Oriented System Engineering (SOSE). IEEE, 2025, pp. 151–161

    2025

Showing first 80 references.