Reinforcement Learning-based Admission Control in Delay-sensitive Service Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ensuring quality of service (QoS) guarantees in service systems is a challenging task, particularly when the system is composed of more fine-grained services, such as service function chains. An important QoS metric in service systems is the end-to-end delay, which becomes even more important in delay-sensitive applications, where the jobs must be completed within a time deadline. Admission control is one way of providing end-to-end delay guarantee, where the controller accepts a job only if it has a high probability of meeting the deadline. In this paper, we propose a reinforcement learning-based admission controller that guarantees a probabilistic upper-bound on the end-to-end delay of the service system, while minimizes the probability of unnecessary rejections. Our controller only uses the queue length information of the network and requires no knowledge about the network topology or system parameters. Since long-term performance metrics are of great importance in service systems, we take an average-reward reinforcement learning approach, which is well suited to infinite horizon problems. Our evaluations verify that the proposed RL-based admission controller is capable of providing probabilistic bounds on the end-to-end delay of the network, without using system model information.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".