MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414110834 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2025.3605977

QoE-Aware User Allocation in NOMA-Enabled MEC Systems: A Distributed Game-Theoretical Approach

2025· article· en· W4414110834 on OpenAlexaff
Yaozong Yang, Ying Chen, Jintao Hu, Zhanqi Cui, Jiwei Huang, Lian Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersBeijing Nova ProgramNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMobile edge computingNash equilibriumQuality of serviceGame theoryEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionChannel (broadcasting)Transmission (telecommunications)Multi-userFrequency allocationChannel allocation schemesUser equipment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In vehicular networks, mobile edge computing (MEC) allows service providers to allocate vehicle terminals (VTs) to edge servers, providing an effective paradigm for low latency computing services. In resources-limited edge computing scenarios, user allocation needs to achieve the goals of minimizing deployment costs and maximizing coverage density while ensuring service quality. However, the differentiated configuration of user power in non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) technology can cause intra-cell and inter-cell interference within the same frequency band, resulting in a significant decrease in transmission rate and a reduction in Quality of Experience (QoE). In this paper, we study the QoE-aware user and power allocation (QUPA) problem with multiple users in a NOMA-enabled MEC system aimed at maximizing users' QoE. We formulate this problem as a QUPA game and theoretically analyze its properties. To achieve the Nash equilibrium for each user, we propose a distributed game-theoretical user and power allocation (GUPA) algorithm that jointly optimizes server selection, channel selection, and transmission power allocation. Meanwhile, we theoretically analyze the convergence and performance by price of anarchy (PoA) of our GUPA algorithm. The experimental results show that the proposed GUPA algorithm can effectively reduce costs and improve user experience in this system.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207