Semantic Routing for Enhanced Performance of LLM-Assisted Intent-Based 5G Core Network Management and Orchestration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Large language models (LLMs) are rapidly emerging in Artificial Intelligence (AI) applications, especially in the fields of natural language processing and generative AI. Not limited to text generation applications, these models inherently possess the opportunity to leverage prompt engineering, where the inputs of such models can be appropriately structured to articulate a model’s purpose explicitly. A prominent example of this is intent-based networking, an emerging approach for automating and maintaining network operations and management. This paper presents semantic routing to achieve enhanced performance in LLM-assisted intent-based management and orchestration of 5G core networks. This work establishes an end-to-end intent extraction framework and presents a diverse dataset of sample user intents accompanied by a thorough analysis of the effects of encoders and quantization on overall system performance. The results show that using a semantic router improves the accuracy and efficiency of the LLM deployment compared to stand-alone LLMs with prompting architectures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".