Communication and Computation O-RAN Resource Slicing for URLLC Services Using Deep Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of the future beyond-5G/6G networks towards a service-aware network is based on network slicing technology. With network slicing, communication service providers seek to meet all the requirements imposed by the verticals, including ultra-reliable low-latency communication (URLLC) services. In addition, the open radio access network (O-RAN) architecture paves the way for flexible sharing of network resources by introducing more programmability into the RAN. RAN slicing is an essential part of end-to-end network slicing since it ensures efficient sharing of communication and computation resources. However, due to the stringent requirements of URLLC services and the dynamics of the RAN environment, RAN slicing is challenging. In this article, we propose a two-level RAN slicing approach based on the O-RAN architecture to allocate the communication and computation RAN resources among URLLC end-devices. For each RAN slicing level, we model the resource slicing problem as a single-agent Markov decision process and design a deep reinforcement learning algorithm to solve it. Simulation results demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed approach in meeting the desired quality of service requirements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".