Resource Allocation for Co-Existence of eMBB and URLLC Services in 6G Wireless Networks: A Survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Next generation of wireless networks are characterized by two main features named Enhanced Mobile Broadband (eMBB) and Ultra Reliable Low Latency Communications (URLLC). These two services can be accommodated in the same wireless infrastructure so that wide range of users, demanding either massive throughput or extremely low latency and high reliability requirements, are directly benefited for providing various mission critical services. Co-existence of eMBB and URLLC services, however, demand highly efficient and less complex resource allocation schemes. In this paper, various resource allocation techniques are studied for the co-existence of eMBB and URLLC traffic to meet the heterogeneous specifications of each class of users. A detailed study on existing resource allocation schemes for simultaneous transmission of eMBB and URLLC services based on network slicing, flexible Transmit Time Interval (TTI), scheduling and distributed and federated learning are provided. Moreover, Machine Learning (ML) aided and Reconfigurable Intelligent Surface (RIS) and UAV assisted resource allocation techniques are also studied in detail. Additionally, this paper identifies some challenges for eMBB and URLLC service accommodation in the same wireless architecture and proposes their possible solution approaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".