MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

5G Open RAN-Based Network Slicing for Connecting Ground-Based and Flying Cars Serving Urban Areas

2024· article· en· W4402159864 on OpenAlexaff
Anselme Ndikumana, Kim Khoa Nguyen, Mohamed Cheriet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanSlicingComputer scienceTransport engineeringTelecommunicationsComputer networkEngineeringWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recently, companies have increasingly developed new technologies for urban air mobility using flying cars to alleviate road congestion. Unfortunately, the seamless integration of flying cars with their ground-based counterparts in the 5G network, where ground-based cars can support flying cars in proving transit functions, has not yet been fully investigated. Flying and ground-based cars require various services, such as autonomous driving/plot, path planning, and remote di-agnosis. Supporting these services in 5G networks is challenging due to the high mobility and stringent network latency requirements. Network slicing is a promising solution. However, a comprehensive research on combining flying and ground-based cars in network slicing is still missing in the literature. Under-provisioning of radio resources can result in the violation of service requirements, while radio resource over-provisioning can cause resource under-utilization. We propose two-level closed-loops for Resource Block (RB) management to satisfy the delay budget constraint of flying and ground-based cars simultaneously while avoiding radio resource under/over provisioning. We design two closed-loops to map slices and services to Open RAN elements for radio resource scheduling and to allocate RB to cars. We propose a zero-touch RB adjustment approach and link these two closed-loops through the reward function of a deep reinforcement learning algorithm that optimizes slice resources in real time. Results show that our approach maximizes delay requirement satisfaction while preventing RB under/over-provisioning.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207