Transfer Reinforcement Learning for 5G New Radio mmWave Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we aim at interference mitigation in 5G millimeter-Wave (mm-Wave) communications by employing beamforming and Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA) techniques with the aim of improving network's aggregate rate. Despite the potential capacity gains of mm-Wave and NOMA, many technical challenges might hinder that performance gain. In particular, the performance of Successive Interference Cancellation (SIC) diminishes rapidly as the number of users increases per beam, which leads to higher intra-beam interference. Furthermore, intersection regions between adjacent cells give rise to inter-beam inter-cell interference. To mitigate both interference levels, optimal selection of the number of beams in addition to best allocation of users to those beams is essential. In this paper, we address the problem of joint user-cell association and selection of number of beams for the purpose of maximizing the aggregate network capacity. We propose three machine learning-based algorithms; transfer Q-learning (TQL), Q-learning, and Best SINR association with Density-based Spatial Clustering of Applications with Noise (BSDC) algorithms and compare their performance under different scenarios. Under mobility, TQL and Q-learning demonstrate 12% rate improvement over BSDC at the highest offered traffic load. For stationary scenarios, Q-learning and BSDC outperform TQL, however TQL achieves about 29% convergence speedup compared to Q-learning.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".