Resource Allocation and Slicing Strategy for Multiple Services Co-Existence in Wireless Train Communication Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wireless train communication network (WLTCN) is an emerging technology for enabling intelligent rail vehicles. It is responsible for providing train control services (TCS), passenger information services (PIS), and train sensing services (TSS). These services within WLTCN have notably different quality of service (QoS) requirements from traditional telecommunication services. In this paper, to incorporate multiple services in a single WLTCN, we propose a radio access network (RAN) slicing architecture empowered WLTCN to satisfy the demands of services and save bandwidth resource. In particular, the service and slicing models of TCS, PIS, and TSS are investigated. By analyzing the heterogeneous characteristics and QoS requirements of the above services within WLTCN, we exploit the orthogonal multiple access scheme for TCS and PIS and the non-orthogonal multiple access scheme for TSS, respectively. The system bandwidth minimization problem is formulated with slicing resource allocation for TCS, PIS, and TSS and non-orthogonal access grouping for TSS terminals as a mixed-integer nonlinear programming (MINLP). To solve the intractable MINLP, the original problem is transformed and decoupled into the two subproblems. Then, we propose a joint bandwidth optimization and terminal clustering (JBOTC) algorithm to tackle the bandwidth allocation problem with optimal terminal grouping strategy for TSS effectively. The closed-form expressions of the optimal bandwidth allocation strategy for three services are derived. The simulation results illustrate the performance superiority for saving bandwidth of the JBOTC algorithm to the benchmark schemes. Our proposed slicing strategy enables WLTCN to support heterogeneous services co-existence with minimal bandwidth consumption.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".