Centralized & Distributed Deep Reinforcement Learning Methods for Downlink Sum-Rate Optimization
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a multi-cell, multi-user, cellular network downlink sum-rate maximization through power allocation is a nonconvex and NP-hard optimization problem. In this paper, we present an effective approach to solving this problem through single- and multi-agent actor-critic deep reinforcement learning (DRL). Specifically, we use finite-horizon trust region optimization. Through extensive simulations, we show that we can simultaneously achieve higher spectral efficiency than state-of-the-art optimization algorithms like weighted minimum mean-squared error (WMMSE) and fractional programming (FP), while offering execution times more than two orders of magnitude faster than these approaches. Additionally, the proposed trust region methods demonstrate superior performance and convergence properties than the Advantage Actor-Critic (A2C) DRL algorithm. In contrast to prior approaches, the proposed decentralized DRL approaches allow for distributed optimization with limited CSI and controllable information exchange between BSs while offering competitive performance and reduced training times.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 it