QoE-oriented Communication Service Provision for Annotation Rendering in Mobile Augmented Reality
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As mobile augmented reality (MAR) continues to evolve, future 6G networks will play a pivotal role in supporting immersive and personalized user experiences. In this paper, we address the communication service provision problem for annotation rendering in edge-assisted MAR, with the objective of optimizing spectrum resource usage while ensuring the required quality of experience (QoE) for MAR users. To overcome the challenges of user-specific uplink data traffic patterns and the complex operational mechanisms of annotation rendering, we propose a digital twin (DT)-based approach. We first design a DT specifically tailored for MAR applications to learn key annotation rendering mechanisms, enabling the network controller to access MAR application-specific information. Then, we develop a DT-based QoE modeling approach to capture the unique relationship between individual user QoE and spectrum resource demands. Finally, we propose a QoE-oriented resource allocation algorithm that decreases resource usage compared to conventional network slicing-based approaches. Simulation results demonstrate that our DT-based approach outperforms benchmark approaches in the accuracy and granularity of QoE modeling.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".