Two-Level Closed Loops for RAN Slice Resources Management Serving Flying and Ground-Based Cars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flying and ground-based cars require various services such as autonomous driving, remote piloting, infotainment, and remote diagnosis. Each service requires specific Quality of Service (QoS) and network features. Therefore, network slicing can be a solution to fulfill the requirements of various services. Some services, such as infotainment, may have similar requirements to serve flying and ground-based cars. Therefore, some slices can serve both kinds of cars. However, when network slice resource sharing is too aggressive, slices can not meet QoS requirements, where resource under-provisioning causes the violation of QoS, and resource over-provisioning causes resources under-utilization. We propose two closed loops for managing RAN slice resources for cars to address these challenges. First, we present an auction mechanism for allocating Resource Block (RB) to the tenants who provide services to the cars using slices. Second, we design one closed loop that maps slices and services of tenants to Open Distributed Units (vO-DUs) and assigns RB to vO-DUs for management purposes. Third, we design another closed loop for intra-slices RB scheduling to serve cars. Fourth, we present a reward function that interconnects these two closed loops to satisfy the time-varying demands of cars at each slice while meeting QoS requirements in terms of delay. Finally, we design distributed deep reinforcement learning approach to maximize the formulated reward function. The simulation results show that our approach satisfies more than 90% vODUs resource constraints and network slice requirements.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".