ML KPI Prediction in 5G and B5G Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Network operators are facing new challenges when meeting the needs of their customers. The challenges arise due to the rise of new services, such as HD video streaming, IoT, autonomous driving, etc., and the exponential growth of network traffic. In this context, 5G and B5G networks have been evolving to accommodate a wide range of applications and use cases. Additionally, this evolution brings new features, like the ability to create multiple end-to-end isolated virtual networks using network slicing. Nevertheless, to ensure the quality of service, operators must maintain and optimize their networks in accordance with the key performance indicators (KPIs) and the slice service-level agreements (SLAs). In this paper, we introduce a machine learning (ML) model used to estimate throughput in 5G and B5G networks with end-to-end (E2E) network slices. Then, we combine the predicted throughput with the current network state to derive an estimate of other network KPIs, which can be used to further improve service assurance. To assess the efficiency of our solution, a performance metric was proposed. Numerical evaluations demonstrate that our KPI prediction model outperforms those derived from other methods with the same or nearly the same computational time.
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 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".