Automatic Fault Detection and Diagnosis in Cellular Networks and Beyond 5G: Intelligent Network Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Handling faults in a running cellular network can impair the performance and dissatisfy the end users. It is important to design an automatic self-healing procedure to not only detect the active faults, but also to diagnosis them automatically. Although fault detection has been well studied in the literature, fewer studies have targeted the more complicated task of diagnosing. Our presented method aims to tackle fault detection and diagnosis using two sets of data collected by the network: performance support system data and drive test data. Although performance support system data is collected automatically by the network, drive test data are collected manually in three mode call scenarios: short, long and idle. The short call can identify faults in a call setup, the long call is designed to identify handover failures and call interruption, and, finally, the idle mode is designed to understand the characteristics of the standard signal in the network. We have applied unsupervised learning, along with various classified algorithms, on performance support system data. Congestion and failures in TCH assignments are a few examples of the detected and diagnosed faults with our method. In addition, we present a framework to identify the need for handovers. The Silhouette coefficient is used to evaluate the quality of the unsupervised learning approach. We achieved an accuracy of 96.86% with the dynamic neural network method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".