Reinforcement Learning With LLMs Interaction for Distributed Diffusion Model Services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Distributed Artificial Intelligence-Generated Content (AIGC) has attracted significant attention, but two key challenges remain: maximizing subjective Quality of Experience (QoE) and improving energy efficiency, which are particularly pronounced in widely adopted Generative Diffusion Model (GDM)-based image generation services. In this paper, we propose a novel user-centric Interactive AI (IAI) approach for service management, with a distributed GDM-based AIGC framework that emphasizes efficient and cooperative deployment. The proposed method restructures the GDM inference process by allowing users with semantically similar prompts to share parts of the denoising chain. Furthermore, to maximize the users' subjective QoE, we propose an IAI approach, i.e., Reinforcement Learning With Large Language Models Interaction (RLLI), which utilizes Large Language Model (LLM)-empowered generative agents to replicate users interactions, providing real-time and subjective QoE feedback aligned with diverse user personalities. Lastly, we present the GDM-based Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (G-DDPG) algorithm, adapted to the proposed RLLI framework, to allocate communication and computing resources effectively while accounting for subjective user traits and dynamic wireless conditions. Simulation results demonstrate that G-DDPG improves total QoE by 15% compared with the standard DDPG algorithm.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".