MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200448595 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3112907

Deep Dyna-Reinforcement Learning Based on Random Access Control in LEO Satellite IoT Networks

2021· article· en· W3200448595 on OpenAlexaff
Xiangnan Liu, Haijun Zhang, Keping Long, Arumugam Nallanathan, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIoT Networks and Protocols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesUniversity of Science and Technology BeijingNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningSatelliteInternet of ThingsComputer networkRandom accessAccess controlDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Random access schemes in satellite Internet-of-Things (IoT) networks are being considered a key technology of new-type machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. However, the complicated situations and long-distance transmission can make the current random access schemes not suitable for the satellite IoT networks. The random access problem in the satellite IoT networks is studied in this article. A novel random access scheme for machine-type-communication devices (MTCDs) is proposed, to maximize the efficiency of random access for contention-based and contention-free random access. Under the set of random access opportunities (RAOs) and limited delay, the random access control model is designed via maximizing efficiency of random access. The model-free deep reinforcement learning (DRL) algorithm is proposed to tackle the problem based on the random access model. Subsequently, the deep Dyna-$Q$learning algorithm is introduced to deal with the proposed random access control model. In this proposed scheme, the random access model-free DRL algorithm is developed using simulated experience. The proposed algorithms’ performances are discussed, and simulation results show the desirable performance of the proposed DRL methods on different system parameters.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations41
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicIoT Networks and ProtocolsFrench-language works237,207