Cellular network configuration plays a critical role in network performance. In current practice, network configuration depends heavily on field experience of engineers and often remains static for a long period of time. This practice is far from optimal. To address this limitation, online-learning-based approaches have great potentials to automate and optimize network configuration. Learning-based approaches face the challenges of learning a highly complex function for each base station and balancing the fundamental exploration-exploitation tradeoff while minimizing the exploration cost. Fortunately, in cellular networks, base stations (BSs) often have similarities even though they are not identical. To leverage such similarities, we propose kernel-based multi-BS contextual bandit algorithm based on multi-task learning. In the algorithm, we leverage the similarity among different BSs defined by conditional kernel embedding. We present theoretical analysis of the proposed algorithm in terms of regret and multi-task-learning efficiency. We evaluate the effectiveness of our algorithm based on a simulator built by real traces.
Recently, learning-based methods are proposed @cite_0 @cite_19 @cite_10 @cite_4 . In @cite_0 , the authors propose a tailored form of reinforcement learning to adaptively select the optimal antenna configuration in a time-varying environment. In @cite_4 , the authors use Q-learning with compact state representation for traffic offloading. In @cite_10 , the authors design a generalized global bandit algorithm to control the transmit power in the cellular coverage optimization problem. In all these papers, BS similarities are not considered, and thus require more exploration. In @cite_19 , the authors study the pilot power configuration problem and design a Gibbs-sampling-based online learning algorithm so as to maximize the throughput of users. In comparison, they make the assumption that all BSs are equal while we allow different BSs to learn different mappings.
@cite_0 @cite_19 @cite_10 @cite_4
2784007778 2791827017 2125890412
In a document network such as a citation network of scientific documents, web-logs, etc., the content produced by authors exhibits their interest in certain topics. In addition some authors influence other authors' interests. In this work, we propose to model the influence of cited authors along with the interests of citing authors. Moreover, we hypothesize that apart from the citations present in documents, the context surrounding the citation mention provides extra topical information about the cited authors. However, associating terms in the context to the cited authors remains an open problem. We propose novel document generation schemes that incorporate the context while simultaneously modeling the interests of citing authors and influence of the cited authors. Our experiments show significant improvements over baseline models for various evaluation criteria such as link prediction between document and cited author, and quantitatively explaining unseen text. Scholars are increasingly citing electronic “web references” which are not preserved in libraries or full text archives. WebCite is a new standard for citing web references. To “webcite” a document involves archiving the cited Web page through www.webcitation.org and citing the WebCite permalink instead of (or in addition to) the unstable live Web page. This journal has amended its “instructions for authors” accordingly, asking authors to archive cited Web pages before submitting a manuscript. Almost 200 other journals are already using the system. We discuss the rationale for WebCite, its technology, and how scholars, editors, and publishers can benefit from the service. Citing scholars initiate an archiving process of all cited Web references, ideally before they submit a manuscript. Authors of online documents and websites which are expected to be cited by others can ensure that their work is permanently available by creating an archived copy using WebCite and providing the citation information including the WebCite link on their Web document(s). Editors should ask their authors to cache all cited Web addresses (Uniform Resource Locators, or URLs) “prospectively” before submitting their manuscripts to their journal. Editors and publishers should also instruct their copyeditors to cache cited Web material if the author has not done so already. Finally, WebCite can process publisher submitted “citing articles” (submitted for example as eXtensible Markup Language [XML] documents) to automatically archive all cited Web pages shortly before or on publication. Finally, WebCite can act as a focussed crawler, caching retrospectively references of already published articles. Copyright issues are addressed by honouring respective Internet standards (robot exclusion files, no-cache and no-archive tags). Long-term preservation is ensured by agreements with libraries and digital preservation organizations. The resulting WebCite Index may also have applications for research assessment exercises, being able to measure the impact of Web services and published Web documents through access and Web citation metrics. @PARASPLIT [J Med Internet Res 2005;7(5):e60] Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to suggest an alternative to the widely used Times Cited criterion for analysing citation networks. The approach involves taking account of the natures of the papers that cite a given paper, so as to differentiate between papers that attract the same number of citations.Design methodology approach – ArticleRank is an algorithm that has been derived from Google's PageRank algorithm to measure the influence of journal articles. ArticleRank is applied to two datasets – a citation network based on an early paper on webometrics, and a self‐citation network based on the 19 most cited papers in the Journal of Documentation – using citation data taken from the Web of Knowledge database.Findings – ArticleRank values provide a different ranking of a set of papers from that provided by the corresponding Times Cited values, and overcomes the inability of the latter to differentiate between papers with the same numbers of citations. The difference in rankings between Times Cited ... The popular h-index used to measure scientific output can be described in terms of a pool of evaluated objects (the papers), a quality function on the evaluated objects (the number of citations received by each paper) and a sentencing line crossing the origin, whose intersection with the graph of the quality function yields the index value (in the h-index this is a line with slope 1). Based on this abstraction, we present a new index, the c-index, in which the evaluated objects are the citations received by an author, a group of authors, a journal, etc., the quality function of a citation is the collaboration distance between the authors of the cited and the citing papers, and the sentencing line can take slopes between 0 and ∞. As a result, the new index counts only those citations which are significant enough, where significance is proportional to collaboration distance. Several advantages of the new c-index with respect to previous proposals are discussed.