MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distributed Multi-Agent Learning for Service Function Chain Partial Offloading at the Edge

2021· article· en· W3182719466 on OpenAlexaff
Fahime Khoramnejad, Roghayeh Joda, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceServerDistributed computingComputer networkReinforcement learningEdge computingVirtual networkMobile edge computingVirtualizationEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionService (business)Computation offloadingWireless networkWirelessArtificial intelligenceOperating systemCloud computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-Access Edge Computing (MEC) along with "learning at the edge" brings unique opportunities for enhancing the utilization of resources in the next generation wireless networks. Using Network Function Virtualization (NFV), Service Function Chains (SFCs), a set of ordered virtual network functions (VNFs), can be deployed within the MEC infrastructure. The user equipment (UEs) can offload VNFs with intense computational load to the MEC servers with rich storage and computation resources. In this paper, we address the problem of partial offloading of a chain of services where each VNF of the SFC request can be either performed locally or offloaded onto a MEC server. The objective is to concurrently minimize the long-term cost of the UEs which is given in terms of both delay and energy consumption. This problem is highly complex and calls for distributed multi-agent learning techniques. We formulate the problem as a distributed multi-agent reinforcement learning problem and use double deep Q-network (DDQN) algorithm to solve it. Our simulation results show that the proposed DDQN-based solution has comparable results to an exhaustive search algorithm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.926
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207