Game Theory-based Allocation Management in VCC Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vehicular Ad-hoc Networks (VANETs) have contributed significantly towards improving road traffic management and safety. VANETs, integrated with Vehicular Clouds, enable underutilized vehicular resources for efficient resource management, fulfilling service requests. However, due to the frequently changing network topology of vehicular cloud networks, the vehicles frequently move out of the coverage area of roadside units (RSUs), disconnecting from the RSUs and interrupting the fulfillment of ongoing service requests. In addition, working with heterogeneous vehicles makes it difficult to match the service requests with the varying resources of individual vehicles. Therefore, to address these challenges, this work introduces the concept of clustering resources from nearby vehicles to form Combined Resource Units (CRUs). These units contribute to maximizing the rate of fulfillment of service requests. CRU composition is helpful, especially for the heterogeneity of vehicles, since it allows clustering the varying resources of vehicles into a single unit. The vehicle resources are clustered into CRUs based on three different sized pools, making the service matching process more time-efficient. Previous works have adopted stochastic models for resource clustering configurations. However, this work adopts distinct search algorithms for CRU composition, which are computationally less complex. Results showed that light-weight search algorithms, such as selective search algorithm (SSA), achieved close to 80% of resource availability without over-assembling CRUs in higher density scenarios. Following CRU composition, a game-theoretical approach is opted for allocating CRUs to service requests. Under this approach, the CRUs play a non-cooperative game to maximize their utility, contributing to factors such as fairness, efficiency, improved system performance and reduced system overhead. The utility value takes into account the RSS (Received Signal Strength) value of each CRU and the resources required in fulfilling a request. Results of the game model showed that the proposed approach of CRU composition obtained 90% success rate towards matching and fulfilling service requests.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".