MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390422261 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2023.3348594

Multitimescale Control and Communications With Deep Reinforcement Learning—Part II: Control-Aware Radio Resource Allocation

2023· article· en· W4390422261 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAge of Information Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer sciencePlatoonResource allocationSample (material)Artificial intelligenceFunction (biology)Process (computing)Control (management)Computer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Part I of this two-part paper (Multitimescale Control and Communications with deep reinforcement learning (DRL)—Part I: Communication-Aware Vehicle Control), we decomposed the multitimescale control and communications (MTCCs) problem in cellular vehicle-to-everything (C-V2X) system into a communication-aware DRL-based platoon control (PC) subproblem and a control-aware DRL-based radio resource allocation (RRA) subproblem. We focused on the PC subproblem and proposed the MTCC-PC algorithm to learn an optimal PC policy given an RRA policy. In this article (Part II), we first focus on the RRA subproblem in MTCC assuming a PC policy is given, and propose the MTCC-RRA algorithm to learn the RRA policy. Specifically, we incorporate the PC advantage function in the RRA reward function, which quantifies the amount of PC performance degradation caused by observation delay. Moreover, we augment the state space of RRA with PC action history for a more well-informed RRA policy. In addition, we utilize reward shaping and reward backpropagation prioritized experience replay (RBPER) techniques to efficiently tackle the multiagent and sparse reward problems, respectively. Finally, a sample- and computational-efficient training approach is proposed to jointly learn the PC and RRA policies in an iterative process. In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed MTCC algorithm, we performed experiments using real driving data for the leading vehicle, where the performance of MTCC is compared with those of the baseline DRL algorithms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.214 · 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