Network Slicing with MEC and Deep Reinforcement Learning for the Internet of Vehicles
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
The interconnection of vehicles in the future fifth generation (5G) wireless ecosystem forms the so-called Internet of Vehicles (IoV). IoV offers new kinds of applications requiring delay-sensitive, compute-intensive, and bandwidth-hungry services. Mobile edge computing (MEC) and network slicing are two of the key enabler technologies in 5G networks that can be used to optimize the allocation of the network resources and guarantee the diverse requirements of IoV applications. As traditional model-based optimization techniques generally end up with NP-hard and strongly non-convex and nonlinear mathematical programming formulations, in this article, we introduce a model-free approach based on deep reinforcement learning (DRL) to solve the resource allocation problem in MEC-enabled IoV networks based on network slicing. Furthermore, the solution uses non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) to enable better exploitation of the scarce channel resources. The considered problem addresses jointly the channel and power allocation, the slice selection, and the vehicle selection (vehicle grouping). We model the problem as a single-agent Markov decision process. Then we solve it using DRL with the well-known deep Q learning (DQL) algorithm. We show that our approach is robust and effective under different network conditions compared to benchmark solutions.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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