MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994431616 · doi:10.1002/dac.4063

Dynamic process location management in 5G

2019· article· en· W2994431616 on OpenAlexaff
Shahin Vakilinia, Halima Elbiaze, Dariush Ebrahimi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communication Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalEricsson (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceLatency (audio)Distributed computingCloud computingMobile edge computingWireless networkRadio access networkComputer networkOrchestrationQuality of serviceSoftware-defined networkingWirelessVirtualizationOperating systemBase station

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 5G, as the next generation of wireless networks, promises very high throughput and low latency to mobile users that calls for a substantial innovation in computing management platforms to attend QoS metrics. Thanks to emerging technologies such as software‐defined networking (SDN)/network function virtualization (NFV), many features are available in 5G design to detect and control two types of latency caused by computation and communication. In this paper, taking features of caching mechanisms and SDN into the account, a platform is proposed to minimize latency in 5G via caching big flows intelligently and avoiding bottlenecks that may cause by virtualized computing components. First, the pioneering idea of compromising between the cloud radio access network (CRAN) and mobile edge computing (MEC)/information‐centric network (ICN) via dynamic processing location management platform is investigated. Accordingly, a mathematical optimization problem to minimize the average latency is formulated. Due to the problem complexity, a heuristic algorithm is proposed to treat the latency via dynamic orchestration of processing functionalities. Through numerical results, the performance of the proposed algorithm is analyzed, and the simulations corroborate our analytical results and illustrate the superior performance of the proposed algorithm with acceptable optimality gap.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communication SystemsSame topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207