MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Cost-Effective Two-Stage Network Slicing for Edge-Cloud Orchestrated Vehicular Networks

2022· article· en· W4297912103 on OpenAlexaff
Wen Wu, Kaige Qu, Peng Yang, Ning Zhang, Xuemin Shen, Weihua Zhuang

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE/CIC International Conference on Communications in China (ICCC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCloud computingSlicingDistributed computingProvisioningEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionBenchmark (surveying)Edge computingResource allocationEdge deviceServerComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we study a network slicing problem for edge-cloud orchestrated vehicular networks, in which the edge and cloud servers are orchestrated to process computation tasks for reducing network slicing cost while satisfying the quality of service requirements. We propose a two-stage network slicing framework, which consists of 1) network planning stage in a large timescale to perform slice deployment, edge resource provisioning, and cloud resource provisioning, and 2) network operation stage in a small timescale to perform resource allocation and task dispatching. Particularly, we formulate the network slicing problem as a two-timescale stochastic optimization problem to minimize the network slicing cost. Since the problem is NP-hard due to coupled network planning and network operation stages, we develop a Two timescAle netWork Slicing (TAWS) algorithm by collaboratively integrating reinforcement learning (RL) and optimization methods, which can jointly make network planning and operation decisions. Specifically, by leveraging the timescale separation property of decisions, we decouple the problem into a large-timescale network planning subproblem and a small-timescale network operation subproblem. The former is solved by an RL method, and the latter is solved by an optimization method. Simulation results based on real-world vehicle traffic traces show that the TAWS can effectively reduce the network slicing cost as compared to the benchmark 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)0.003
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE/CIC International Conference on Communications in China (ICCC)Same topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207