MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387986615 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2023.3328016

Smart Dynamic Pricing and Cooperative Resource Management for Mobility-Aware and Multi-Tier Slice-Enabled 5G and Beyond Networks

2023· article· en· W4387986615 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Nouruzi, Nader Mokari, Paeiz Azmi, Eduard A. Jorswieck, Melike Erol‐Kantarci

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5G
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceCellular networkComputer networkResource allocationOptimization problemReinforcement learningTask (project management)Resource management (computing)Shared resourceDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a novel cooperative resource sharing technique in multi-tier edge slicing networks which is robust to imperfect channel state information (CSI) caused by user equipments’ (UEs) mobility. Due to the mobility of UEs, the dynamic requirements of their tasks, and the limited resources of the network, we propose a smart joint dynamic pricing and resources sharing (SJDPRS) scheme that can incentivize the infrastructure provider (InP) and mobile network operators (MNOs). Aiming to maximize the profits of UEs, MNOs and the InP under the task fulfillment constraints, we formulate an optimization problem by deploying the multi-objective optimization method where in addition to the resource allocation variables, the price values are also the optimization variables. To solve the problem, we adopt a new deep reinforcement learning (DRL) method based on a carefully designed reward function. The simulation results indicate that the proposed resource sharing scenario can increase total profits for the UEs, MNOs, and InP in comparison to non-cooperative case, while also providing almost complete fairness among the players. In particular, as compared to the baselines and benchmarks, the profits for each network component (MNO, InP, and UEs), under fairness considerations, are enhanced by 75%, 79%, and 76%, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.220 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service ManagementSame topicSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GFrench-language works237,207