MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312511964 · doi:10.1109/mnet.128.2200338

Exploring Attention-Aware Network Resource Allocation for Customized Metaverse Services

2022· article· en· W4312511964 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Network · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Video Quality Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceMetaverseRendering (computer graphics)Quality of experienceResource allocationVirtual realityHuman–computer interactionWorld Wide WebMultimediaQuality of serviceComputer networkArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging with the support of computing and communications technologies, Metaverse is expected to bring users unprecedented service experiences. However, the increase in the number of Metaverse users places a heavy demand on network resources, especially for Metaverse services that are based on graphical extended reality and require rendering a plethora of virtual objects. To make efficient use of network resources and improve the Quality-of-Experience (QoE), we design an attentionaware network resource allocation scheme to achieve customized Metaverse services. The aim is to allocate more network resources to virtual objects in which users are more interested. We first discuss several key techniques related to Metaverse services, including QoE analysis, eye-tracking, and remote rendering. We then review existing datasets and propose the user-objectattention level (UOAL) dataset that contains the ground truth attention of 30 users to 96 objects in 1; 000 images. With the help of UOAL, we propose an attention-aware network resource allocation algorithm that has two steps, i.e., attention prediction and QoE maximization. Specially, we provide an overview of the designs of two types of attention prediction methods, i.e., interestaware and time-aware prediction. By using the predicted userobject- attention values, network resources such as the rendering capacity of edge devices can be allocated optimally to maximize the QoE. Finally, we propose promising research directions related to Metaverse services.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.207 · 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