MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403420399 · doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2024.3480987

Dynamic Pricing in Multi-Tenant MANO With Resource Sharing: A Stackelberg Game Approach

2024· article· en· W4403420399 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOptimization and Search Problems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStackelberg competitionComputer scienceSequential gameMicroeconomicsResource (disambiguation)Game theoryEconomicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network slicing is used to support the stringent requirements of sixth generation (6G) services by dividing an infrastructure network into multiple logical networks that can enable service-oriented resource allocation. However, there are several orchestration issues when considering multiple infrastructure providers (InPs) and multiple tenants in a recursive architecture. There are also challenging issues in designing efficient auction mechanisms for such multi-domain and multi-tenant network slicing. To address these challenges, we consider multi-tenant management and orchestration as a multi-buyer, multi-seller scenario, and propose a novel two-stage auction mechanism that aims to increase the overall utility of all participants while mitigating the overall cost of the network. We formulate this two-stage auction mechanism as a multi-leader multi-follower (MLMF) Stackelberg game approach that converges to a Stackelberg equilibrium. In this game, there are multiple InPs that lease network, computing, and storage infrastructure resources to multiple Tier1 tenants in the first stage of the auction mechanism. Next, Tier1 tenants instantiate triple 6G slices as extremely reliable and low-latency communications (eURLLC), ultra-massive machine-type communications (umMTC), and further enhanced mobile broadband (FeMBB) slices, and lease smaller slices to Tier2 tenants through the second step of the auction mechanism. Tier2 tenants then serve different eURLLC, umMTC, and FeMBB users who have specific and mostly different requirements and constraints, while Tier2 tenants manage their own resources to maximize their utility. Due to the distributed nature of the proposed problem, we consider distributed reinforcement learning (DRL) as a solution. Simulation results show that our DRL-based solution increases the average profit of the network by 19% compared to the existing state-of-the-art benchmark.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesOpen science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0080.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.261 · 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