MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406321664 · doi:10.1109/twc.2024.3525410

Diffusion-Based Deep Reinforcement Learning for Resource Management in Connected Construction Equipment Networks: A Hierarchical Framework

2025· article· en· W4406321664 on OpenAlexaff
Pengfei Ning, Hongwei Wang, Tao Tang, Jie Zhang, Hongyang Du, Dusit Niyato, F. Richard Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBIM and Construction Integration
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersBeijing Jiaotong University
KeywordsReinforcement learningComputer scienceDiffusionResource management (computing)Artificial intelligenceComputer networkDistributed computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the extensive adoption of information technology, tunnel construction is experiencing a rapid digital transformation. Integrating powerful direct communication among construction equipment (CE) facilitates real-time data exchange, promoting collaborative operations among CE. Concurrent execution of multiple construction procedures leads to a significant rise in the amount of CE and communication links, resulting in resource competition. However, this competition is aimed at enhancing collaboration. To address this inherently contradictory issue, we propose a hierarchical resource management framework and align communication quality of service (QoS) to construction efficiency using construction procedure coherence degree (CPCD) based on age of information (AoI). By formulating resource management as a stochastic optimization problem, a suitable online two-level deep reinforcement learning algorithm referred to as diffusion based soft actor critic (DSAC)-QMIX is designed to derive the radio resource allocation strategies. DSAC is responsible for orchestrating spectrum inter-fleets at the high-level, and QMIX makes the resource management and power control decision for each CE at the low-level. Simulation results validate the effectiveness of the DSAC-QMIX algorithm with comparable transmission rate, and show superior performance in terms of CPCD satisfaction compared with other benchmarks.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicBIM and Construction IntegrationFrench-language works237,207