CLSA: Contrastive-Learning-Based Survival Analysis for Popularity Prediction in MEC Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mobile-edge caching (MEC) integrated with deep neural networks (DNNs) is an innovative technology with significant potential for the future generation of wireless networks, resulting in a considerable reduction in users’ latency. The mobile-edge caching (MEC) network’s effectiveness, however, heavily relies on its capacity to predict and dynamically update the storage of caching nodes with the most popular contents. To be effective, a DNN-based popularity prediction model needs to have the ability to understand the historical request patterns of content, including their temporal and spatial correlations. Existing state-of-the-art time-series DNN models capture the latter by simultaneously inputting the sequential request patterns of multiple contents to the network, considerably increasing the size of the input sample. This motivates us to address this challenge by proposing a DNN-based popularity prediction framework based on the idea of contrasting input samples against each other, designed for the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-aided MEC networks. Referred to as the contrastive learning-based survival analysis (CLSA), the proposed architecture consists of a self-supervised contrastive learning (CL) model, where the temporal information of sequential requests is learned using a long short-term memory (LSTM) network as the encoder of the CL architecture. Followed by a survival analysis (SA) network, the output of the proposed CLSA architecture is probabilities for each content’s future popularity, which are then sorted in descending order to identify the Top-$K$popular contents. Based on the simulation results, the proposed CLSA architecture outperforms its counterparts across the classification accuracy and cache-hit ratio.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".