DSROQ: Dynamic Scheduling and Routing for QoE Management in LEO Satellite Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The modern Internet supports diverse applications with heterogeneous quality of service (QoS) requirements. Low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite constellations offer a promising solution to meet these needs, enhancing coverage in rural areas and complementing terrestrial networks in urban regions. Ensuring QoS in such networks requires joint optimization of routing, bandwidth allocation, and dynamic queue scheduling, as traffic handling is critical for maintaining service performance. This paper formulates a joint routing and bandwidth allocation problem where QoS requirements are treated as soft constraints, aiming to maximize user experience. An adaptive scheduling approach is introduced to prioritize flow-specific QoS needs. We propose a Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS)-inspired method to solve the NP-hard route and bandwidth allocation problem, with Lyapunov optimization-based scheduling applied during reward evaluation. Using the Starlink Phase 1 Version 2 constellation, we compare end-user experience and fairness between our proposed DSROQ algorithm and a benchmark scheme. Results show that DSROQ improves both performance metrics and demonstrates the advantage of joint routing and bandwidth decisions. Furthermore, we observe that the dominant performance factor shifts from scheduling to routing and bandwidth allocation as traffic sensitivity changes from latency-driven to bandwidth-driven.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".