Digital Twin-Based 3D Map Management for Edge-Assisted Mobile Augmented Reality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we design a 3D map management scheme for edge-assisted mobile augmented reality (MAR) to support the pose estimation of individual MAR device, which uploads camera frames to an edge server. Our objective is to minimize the pose estimation uncertainty of the MAR device by periodically selecting a proper set of camera frames for uploading to update the 3D map. To address the challenges of the dynamic uplink data rate and the time-varying pose of the MAR device, we propose a digital twin (DT)-based approach to 3D map management. First, a DT is created for the MAR device, which emulates 3D map management based on predicting subsequent camera frames. Second, a model-based reinforcement learning (MBRL) algorithm is developed, utilizing the data collected from both the actual and the emulated data to manage the 3D map. With extensive emulated data provided by the DT, the MBRL algorithm can quickly provide an adaptive map management policy in a highly dynamic environment. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed DT-based 3D map management outperforms benchmark schemes by achieving lower pose estimation uncertainty and higher data efficiency in dynamic environments.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".