MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321609790 · doi:10.1109/tnse.2022.3226422

Intelligent Task Allocation for Mobile Crowdsensing With Graph Attention Network and Deep Reinforcement Learning

2023· article· en· W4321609790 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceHeuristicsReinforcement learningTask (project management)SolverTask analysisArtificial intelligenceDistributed computingMachine learningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mobile crowdsensing (MCS) leverages crowd intelligence, i.e., smart devices and their owners, to collect data in an intelligent and cost-efficient manner. One of the fundamental research problems in MCS is task allocation, where a group of smart device owners are recruited as workers to reach and sense specified targets. In task allocation, task publishers submit their data collection tasks with the constraints and budgets, while workers report their estimated costs and possible constraints associated with data collection. The task allocation problem aims at allocating tasks to workers to maximize profit from the gap between the compensation to workers and the available budget while satisfying constraints from both sides. As task allocation problems are often NP-hard, heuristic schemes are widely used to obtain time-efficient results. However, the performance of heuristic methods may vary significantly in different environments, especially for NP-hard problems. To address task allocation problems in MCS, in this paper, we integrate a carefully designed graph attention network (GAT) into deep reinforcement learning (DRL) and develop a GAT-based DRL method (GDRL) to solve an NP-hard task allocation problem. Compared with manually crafted heuristics, our approach features the flexibility and self-adaptability of DRL, enabling the solver to interact with and adjust to new environments and generalize its experience to different situations. Extensive numerical results show that our proposed method can achieve significantly better results than the reference schemes in various experiment settings.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.790

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.201 · 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