MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep Q-Learning for Low-Latency Tactile Applications: Microgrid Communications

2018· article· en· W2908049050 on OpenAlexaff
Medhat Elsayed, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMicrogridLatency (audio)Computer networkEnablingQuality of serviceDistributed computingUser equipmentWirelessBase stationLow latency (capital markets)Resource allocationWireless networkControl (management)Artificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ultra low-latency is one of the key requirements of tactile internet applications such as microgrid communication, where low end-to-end delay of control messages is essential. In addition, small cell wireless networks emerge as the enabler of networked microgrids, given their coverage, capacity and flexibility. Such densification can help in addressing the stringent QoS requirements of microgrid communications. In dense networks, besides the traditional resource allocation problem, user association can help in reducing communication latency, where users can associate with the base stations that can serve best. In this paper, we jointly address resource allocation and user/device association when Critical User Devices (CUDs), i.e. microgrid controllers, and non-critical users, i.e. User Equipments (UEs), co-exist in a small cell network. We formulate our optimization problem as a resource allocation as well as user association problem. We propose a deep Q-Network based algorithm, namely Delay Minimizing Deep Q-Network (DM-DQN) to address the low-latency requirement. DM-DQN aims at reducing the delay of CUDs by balancing the trade-off between allocating more RBs and associating devices to base stations with high channel quality. We compare the performance of DM-DQN to a tabular Q-learning algorithm. Our results show that the proposed scheme achieves 41% delay reduction for CUDs and it converges faster than Q-learning based scheme algorithm.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score0.493

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicEnergy Harvesting in Wireless NetworksFrench-language works237,207