Split Learning for Sensing-Aided Single and Multi-Level Beam Selection in Multi-Vendor RAN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Proper and efficient beam selection is of great importance to unleash the full potential of mmWave communications. Traditionally, each candidate beam is evaluated using reference signals (beam sweeping), however, the exhaustive search method can be time-consuming with high signaling overhead. To avoid such problems, in B5G and 6G, sensing information is considered to be used, as in Integrated Sensing and Communication (ISAC) solutions, and Machine Learning (ML) methods can be applied to map sensing data inputs to an optimal beam index. When using sensing information sources external to the Radio Access Network (RAN) in a multi-vendor disaggregated environment, those methods need to account for issues such as privacy and data ownership. In this work, we apply multi-modal sensing information to the beam selection task. Specifically, we propose a multi-modal sensing-aided ML strategy based on Split Learning (SL) that can cope with deployment challenges in novel RAN architectures. Moreover, the method is applied to single and multi-level beam selection decisions, where the latter considers the case of hierarchical codebook structures. With the proposed approach, accuracy levels above 90% can be achieved while overhead diminishes by 85% or more. SL achieves comparable performance with centralized learning-based strategies, with the added value of accounting for privacy and data ownership issues. We also show that sensing-aided ML-based beam selection decisions in multi-level codebooks are more effective when applied to their first level.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".