A Survey on Large Language Models for Communication, Network, and Service Management: Application Insights, Challenges, and Future Directions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rapid evolution of communication networks in recent decades has intensified the need for advanced Network and Service Management (NSM) strategies to address the growing demands for efficiency, scalability, enhanced performance, and reliability of these networks. Large Language Models (LLMs) have received tremendous attention due to their unparalleled capabilities in various Natural Language Processing (NLP) tasks and generating context-aware insights, offering transformative potential for automating diverse communication NSM tasks. Contrasting existing surveys that consider a single network domain, this survey investigates the integration of LLMs across different communication network domains, including mobile networks and related technologies, vehicular networks, cloud-based networks, and fog/edge-based networks. First, the survey provides foundational knowledge of LLMs, explicitly detailing the generic transformer architecture, general-purpose and domain-specific LLMs, LLM model pre-training and fine-tuning, and their relation to communication NSM. Under a novel taxonomy of network monitoring and reporting, AI-powered network planning, network deployment and distribution, and continuous network support, we extensively categorize LLM applications for NSM tasks in each of the different network domains, exploring existing literature and their contributions thus far. Then, we identify existing challenges and open issues, as well as future research directions for LLM-driven communication NSM, emphasizing the need for scalable, adaptable, and resource-efficient solutions that align with the dynamic landscape of communication networks. We envision that this survey serves as a holistic roadmap, providing critical insights for leveraging LLMs to enhance NSM.
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 | 0.006 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
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".