MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403600537 · doi:10.1109/taes.2024.3475991

Task Scheduling in Cognitive Multifunction Radar Using Model-Based DRL

2024· article· en· W4403600537 on OpenAlexafffund
Sunila Akbar, Raviraj Adve, Zhen Ding, Peter W. Moo

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversity of Toronto
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceRadarScheduling (production processes)Radar systemsTask (project management)Radar trackerProcessor schedulingEngineeringSystems engineeringTelecommunicationsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There has been much recent work on machine learning-based approaches for cognitive task scheduling in multifunction radar (MFR). However, the available MFR scheduling approaches rely on knowledge of the operating environment; in practice, though, the inherent uncertainty with dynamic radar environments poses significant challenges, especially for cognitive MFR. Here, we address the need for online task scheduling in a cognitive MFR without prior knowledge of the environment. We draw inspiration from recent advancements in model-based deep reinforcement learning, specifically the applicability of MuZero, to enable cognitive MFR in unknown and continuously changing environments. In this approach, the scheduler learns an abstract Markov decision process (MDP) model of the environment, allowing near-optimal abstract MDP planning to translate effectively into the actual environment. However, with exponential complexity, the published MuZero approach requires long training times and is useful only for a few tasks. Here, we modify the original MuZero algorithm to accommodate large number of tasks by incorporating prior knowledge of the task scheduling problem. Our numerical results show that the modified-MuZero approach is effective and computationally efficient in complex radar scenarios.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.637

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.299 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic SystemsSame topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207