Quality-of-Experience Evaluation for Digital Twins in 6G Network Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As wireless technology continues its rapid evolution, the sixth-generation (6G) networks are capable of offering exceptionally high data transmission rates as well as low latency, which is promisingly able to meet the high-demand needs for digital twins (DTs). Quality-of-experience (QoE) in this situation, which refers to the users’ overall satisfaction and perception of the provided DT service in 6G networks, is significant to optimize the service and help improve the users’ experience. Despite progress in developing theories and systems for digital twin transmission under 6G networks, the assessment of QoE for users falls behind. To address this gap, our paper introduces the first QoE evaluation database for human digital twins (HDTs) in 6G network environments, aiming to systematically analyze and quantify the related quality factors. We utilize a mmWave network model for channel capacity simulation and employ high-quality digital humans as source models, which are further animated, encoded, and distorted for final QoE evaluation. Subjective quality ratings are collected from a well-controlled subjective experiment for the 400 generated HDT sequences. Additionally, we propose a novel QoE evaluation metric that considers both quality-of-service (QoS) and content-quality features. Experimental results indicate that our model outperforms existing state-of-the-art QoE evaluation models and other competitive quality assessment models, thus making significant contributions to the domain of 6G network applications for HDTs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".