MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416650073 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2025.3637046

Two-Timescales Optimization of Content Placement and Delivery in Satellite-Terrestrial Edge Computing Networks

2025· article· en· W4416650073 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Renchao Xie, Qinqin Tang, Zeru Fang, Tao Huang, Zehui Xiong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityQueen's UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsMarkov decision processLeverage (statistics)Reinforcement learningOptimization problemCacheEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionEdge deviceInteger programmingEdge computingQuality of service

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we establish a two-timescale framework for the joint optimization for the content placement and content delivery problem in satellite-terrestrial edge computing networks (STECN). Our goal is to optimize content placement to improve network performance while ensuring diverse quality of service (QoS) for content delivery. We decouple the problem into two timescales to balance real-time responsiveness and long-term efficiency. Specifically, considering frequent content placement incurs huge traffic cost, we optimize the content placement in order to reduce resource expenses in large timescales. The optimization problem is formulated as an integer linear programming (ILP) problem to improve both traffic efficiency and cache resource utilization. We leverage a heuristic atom search optimization (ASO) approach to address the problem, which yields an optimal strategy with low computational complexity. In small timescales, we model content delivery as a Markov decision process (MDP) to minimize content delivery delays at small timescales while maintaining smooth network traffic. A deep reinforcement learning (DRL) framework is used for policy learning to dynamically adapt to varying network conditions. By considering the correlation between the small and large timescale optimization, we propose a hierarchical solution to jointly address both issues. Finally, extensive simulations confirm the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed scheme.

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 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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.737

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.223 · 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.

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 venueIEEE Transactions on CommunicationsSame topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207