MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201976554 · doi:10.1109/tccn.2021.3116251

On Joint Offloading and Resource Allocation: A Double Deep Q-Network Approach

2021· article· en· W3201976554 on OpenAlexafffund
Fahime Khoramnejad, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and Networking · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningResource allocationCellular networkMobile edge computingDistributed computingBase stationTelecommunications linkComputer networkDeep learningEdge computingWireless networkResource management (computing)Q-learningComputation offloadingTransmitter power outputEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionWirelessArtificial intelligenceServerChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsTransmitter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multi-access edge computing (MEC) is an important enabling technology for 5G and 6G networks. With MEC, mobile devices can offload their computationally heavy tasks to a nearby server which can be a simple node at a base station, a vehicle or another device. With the increasing number of devices, slices and multiple radio access technologies, the problem of task offloading is becoming an increasingly complex problem. Thus, traditional approaches experience limitations while machine learning algorithms emerge as promising methods. In this paper, we consider binary and partial offloading problems and aim to jointly find optimal decisions for offloading and resource allocation which maximize the number of computed bits while minimizing the energy consumption. This allows improved usage of uplink transmit power and local CPU resources. We propose the Deep Reinforcement Learning for Joint Resource Allocation and Offloading (DJROM) algorithm that uses the double deep Q-network approach and models UEs as agents. We compare the proposed approach with two other machine learning based techniques, namely, multi-agent deep Q-learning (MARL-DQL) and multi-agent deep Q network (MARL-DQN) under fixed and mobile scenarios. Our results show that, DJROM scheme enhances the efficiency better than the other compared algorithms.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Cognitive Communications and NetworkingSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207