MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

How Does Forecasting Affect the Convergence of DRL Techniques in O-RAN Slicing?

2023· article· en· W4392159079 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad M. Nagib, Hatem Abou-Zeid, Hossam S. Hassanein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Neural Network Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlicingConvergence (economics)RanAffect (linguistics)Computer scienceArtificial intelligencePsychologyEconomicsWorld Wide WebComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The success of immersive applications such as virtual reality (VR) gaming and metaverse services depends on low latency and reliable connectivity. To provide seamless user experiences, the open radio access network (O-RAN) architecture and 6G networks are expected to play a crucial role. RAN slicing, a critical component of the O-RAN paradigm, enables network resources to be allocated based on the needs of immersive services, creating multiple virtual networks on a single physical infrastructure. In the O-RAN literature, deep reinforcement learning (DRL) algorithms are commonly used to optimize resource allocation. However, the practical adoption of DRL in live deployments has been sluggish. This is primarily due to the slow convergence and performance instabilities suffered by the DRL agents both upon initial deployment and when there are significant changes in network conditions. In this paper, we investigate the impact of time series forecasting of traffic demands on the convergence of the DRL-based slicing agents. For that, we conduct an exhaustive experiment that supports multiple services including real VR gaming traffic. We then propose a novel forecasting-aided DRL approach and its respective O-RAN practical deployment workflow to enhance DRL convergence. Our approach shows up to 22.8%, 86.3%, and 300% improvements in the average initial reward value, convergence rate, and number of converged scenarios respectively, enhancing the generalizability of the DRL agents compared with the implemented baselines. The results also indicate that our approach is robust against forecasting errors and that forecasting models do not have to be ideal.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Neural Network ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207