MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294811270 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2022.3204846

Delay-Aware and Energy-Efficient Carrier Aggregation in 5G Using Double Deep Q-Networks

2022· article· en· W4294811270 on OpenAlexafffund
Fahime Khoramnejad, Roghayeh Joda, Akram Bin Sediq, Hatem Abou-Zeid, Ramy Atawia, Gary Boudreau, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MIMO Systems Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryEricsson (Canada)University of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Quality of serviceEnergy consumptionUser equipmentScheme (mathematics)Distributed computingComputer networkMathematical optimizationReal-time computingBase stationEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As one of the key technologies in 5G networks, Carrier Aggregation (CA) is studied in this paper. In CA, Component Carriers (CCs) can be activated and deactivated depending on multiple factors, e.g., energy consumption and Quality of Service (QoS) demand of users. We propose CC management strategies where each User Equipment (UE) minimizes its average delay and at the same time minimizes its power consumption while considering that CCs can be activated and deactivated only at certain times, as in real-world CA implementations. We first model the problem as a centralized multi-objective optimum CC management problem. Since centralized approaches would impose a large overhead on the system, we then develop a semi-distributed solution by modeling the problem as a stochastic game and propose a multi-agent Double Deep Q-Network (DDQN) based CC management algorithm to solve the stochastic game. We finally compare the proposed approaches with single CC activation and all-CC activation baseline schemes. Simulation results show that our proposed algorithms outperform the all-CC algorithm in terms of UE power consumption and have the capability of transmitting a number of bits with delay close to the all-CC scheme. Meanwhile, our DDQN-based algorithm decreases the UE power consumption by about 20% with respect to the all-CC scheme.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.244
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations27
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced MIMO Systems OptimizationFrench-language works237,207