Decentralized Task Assignment for Mobile Crowdsensing With Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Task assignment is a fundamental research problem in mobile crowdsensing (MCS) since it directly determines an MCS system’s practicality and economic value. Due to the complex dynamics of tasks and workers, task assignment problems are usually NP-hard, and approximation-based methods are preferred to impractical optimal methods. In the literature, a graph neural network-based deep reinforcement learning (GDRL) method is proposed in Xu and Song (2022) to solve routing problems in MCS and shows high performance and time efficiency. However, GDRL, as a centralized method, has to cope with the limitation in scalability and the challenge of privacy protection. In this article, we propose a multi-agent deep reinforcement learning-based method named communication-QMIX-based multi-agent DRL (CQDRL) to solve a task assignment problem in a decentralized fashion. The CQDRL method not only inherits the merits of GDRL over handcrafted heuristic and metaheuristic methods but also exploits computation potentials in mobile devices and protects workers’ privacy with a decentralized decision-making scheme. Our extensive experiments show that the CQDRL method can achieve significantly better performance than other traditional methods and performs fairly close to the centralized GDRL 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it