Joint resource allocation and security redundancy for autonomous driving based on deep reinforcement learning algorithm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Autonomous vehicles navigating urban roads require technology that combines low latency with high computing power. The limited resources of the vehicle itself compel it to offload task requirements to edge server (ES) for processing assistance. However, as the number of vehicles continues to increase, how edge servers reasonably allocate limited resources to autonomous vehicles becomes critical to the success of urban intelligent transportation services. This paper establishes an urban road scenario with multiple autonomous vehicles and an edge computing server and considers two main driving behaviour transition resource requests, namely car‐following behaviour requests and lane‐changing behaviour requests. Simultaneously, acknowledging that vehicles may encounter unforeseen traffic hazards when switching driving behaviours, a safety redundancy setting strategy is employed to allocate additional resources to the vehicle to ensure safety and model the vehicle resource allocation problem in the autonomous driving system. Double‐deep Q‐network (DDQN) is then used to solve this model and maximize the total system utility by comprehensively considering resource costs, system revenue, and autonomous vehicle safety. Finally, results from the simulation experiment indicate that the proposed dynamic resource allocation scheme, based on deep reinforcement learning for autonomous vehicles under edge computing, not only greatly improves the system's benefits and reduces processing delays compared to traditional greedy algorithms and value iteration, but also effectively ensures security.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".