MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3161701387 · doi:10.1109/jsyst.2022.3171232

Service Function Chaining in MEC: A Mean-Field Game and Reinforcement Learning Approach

2022· article· en· W3161701387 on OpenAlexaff
Amine Abouaomar, Soumaya Cherkaoui, Zoubeir Mlika, Abdellatif Kobbane

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Systems Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChainingComputer scienceReinforcement learningDistributed computingVirtual networkGame theoryScheduling (production processes)Edge computingLatency (audio)Enhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMathematical optimizationComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiaccess edge computing (MEC) and network virtualization technologies are important enablers for fifth generation networks to deliver diverse services. Services are often provided as fully connected virtual network functions (VNFs), through service function chaining (SFC). However, the problem of allocating SFC resources at the edge still faces many challenges related to the way VNFs are placed, chained, and scheduled. In this article, to solve these problems, we propose a game theory-based approach with the objective to reduce service latency in the context of SFC at the edge. The problem of allocating SFC resources can be divided into two subproblems: 1) the VNF placement and routing subproblem, and 2) the VNF scheduling subproblem. For the former subproblem, we formulate it as a mean-field game in which VNFs are contending over edge resources aiming at reducing the resource consumption of MEC nodes and reducing latency for users. We also propose a reinforcement learning-based technique, where the Ishikawa--Mann learning algorithm is used. For the later subproblem, we formulate it as a matching game between VFNs and edge resources to find the execution order of the VNFs while reducing the latency. To efficiently solve it, we propose a modified version of the many-to-one deferred acceptance algorithm (DAA), called the enhanced multistep DAA. To illustrate the performance of the proposed approaches, we perform extensive simulations. The results show that the approaches achieve up to 40% less resource consumption, and up to 38% less latency than the benchmarked state-of-the-art methods.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Systems JournalSame topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207