MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Interaction-Aware Resource Reservation for Edge-Assisted Mobile Extended Reality

2025· article· en· W4414118063 on OpenAlexaff
Yingying Pei, Shisheng Hu, Conghao Zhou, Xinyu Huang, Mingcheng He, Weihua Zhuang, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReservationQuality of experienceRendering (computer graphics)Resource (disambiguation)User experience designQuality of serviceBenchmark (surveying)Scheme (mathematics)Virtual reality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a novel interaction-aware resource reservation scheme for edge-assisted mobile extended reality (XR). Our objective is to minimize reserved resources for XR services while satisfying user requirements on quality of experience (QoE), including visual quality, quality variation, and round-trip latency. First, we develop a novel interactive mobility model for XR users, which captures both user mobility features and their interaction behaviors with XR content. Specifically, user interaction duration and viewing distance preferences are modeled as key parameters that can affect spatiotemporal service demand for XR content rendering and delivery. Second, we estimate the model parameters for individual users and use a sample average approximation method to assess the impact of communication and computing resource reservations on user QoE. Finally, we adopt a coordinate descent-based search algorithm to obtain the resource reservation decision. Simulation results demonstrate that our proposed scheme can effectively reduce network resource consumption in comparison with benchmark schemes while ensuring user QoE satisfaction.

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)0.002
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207