D2D Mobile Relaying Meets NOMA—Part II: A Reinforcement Learning Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Structureless communications such as Device-to-Device (D2D) relaying are undeniably of paramount importance to improving the performance of today's mobile networks. Such a communication paradigm requires a certain level of intelligence at the device level, thereby allowing it to interact with the environment and make proper decisions. However, decentralizing decision-making may induce paradoxical outcomes, resulting in a drop in performance, which sustains the design of self-organizing yet efficient systems. We propose that each device decides either to directly connect to the eNodeB or get access via another device through a D2D link. In the first part of this article, we describe a biform game framework to analyze the proposed self-organized system's performance, under pure and mixed strategies. We use two reinforcement learning (RL) algorithms, enabling devices to self-organize and learn their pure/mixed equilibrium strategies in a fully distributed fashion. Decentralized RL algorithms are shown to play an important role in allowing devices to be self-organized and reach satisfactory performance with incomplete information or even under uncertainties. We point out through a simulation the importance of D2D relaying and assess how our learning schemes perform under slow/fast channel fading.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 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".