MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307818238 · doi:10.32920/21453783

Performance of cache placement using supervised learning techniques in mobile edge networks

2022· preprint· en· W4307818238 on OpenAlexaff
Lubna Badri Mohammed, Alagan Anpalagan, Ahmed Shaharyar Khwaja, Muhammad Jaseemuddin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCaching and Content Delivery
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCacheComputer scienceCache algorithmsSmart CacheSupport vector machineEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionComputer networkCache invalidationBase stationCPU cacheMachine learningArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>With the growth of mobile data traffic in wireless networks, caches are used to bring data closer to mobile users and to minimise the traffic load on macro base station (MBS). Storing data in caches on user terminals (UTs) and small base stations (SBSs) faces challenges with respect to the decision of cache contents. Here, a multi‐objective cache content strategy that aims to maximise the cache hitrate of SBSs in mobile edge networks (MENs) is proposed. The multi‐objective cache placement optimisation is formulated as a classification problem. Unlike previous work, mobility input attributes such as user locations, contact duration, communication ranges, contact probability between UTs and SBSs, etc. as well as content popularity and the correlation between these input attributes separating the decision space into two regions of cache and not cache are used.Stochastic gradient descent algorithm is used for the training of three supervised machine learning techniques: artificial neural network ANN, support vector machine (SVM), and logistic regression LR to define the hyperplane that separates the cache content decision space. Simulation results show that compared with the weighted‐sum approach, the SBSs cache hit rates increase on the average by 18.58%, 18.52%, and 18.2%, and the total energy consumption values decrease on the average by 33.49%, 53.19%, and 49.9% for ANN, SVM, and LR, respectively.</p>

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.887

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCaching and Content DeliveryFrench-language works237,207