Constrained Bandit Learning with Switching Costs for Wireless Networks
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
Bandits with arm selection constraints and bandits with switching costs have both gained recent attention in wireless networking research. Pessimistic-optimistic algorithms, which combine bandit learning with virtual queues to track the constraints, are commonly employed in the former. Block-based algorithms, where switching is disallowed within a block, are commonly employed in the latter. While efficient algorithms have been developed for both problems, it remains challenging to guarantee low regret and constraint violation in a bandit problem that includes both arm selection constraints and switching costs due to the tight coupling between the two. Here, switching may be necessary to decrease the constraint violation but comes at the cost of increased switching regret. In this paper, we tackle the constrained bandits with switching costs problem, for which we design a block-based pessimistic-optimistic algorithm. We identify three timely wireless networking applications for this framework in edge computing, mobile crowdsensing, and wireless network selection. We also prove that our algorithm achieves sublinear regret and vanishing constraint violation and corroborate these results with synthetic simulations and extensive trace-based simulations in the wireless network selection setting.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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