## 4 Proposed Algorithm
### Network Slicing Resource Allocation Algorithm Based on LSTM-D3 QN with DC
Comparing Figure 8a,b, we can conclude that although the

Figure 7: The comparison of optimization goals under the LSTM-D3 QN algorithm with and without dual connectivity assistance while there is no service priority. (**a**) The comparison of utility; (**b**) the comparison of system throughput; (**c**) the comparison of QoE of eMBB; (**d**) the comparison of QoE of URLLC. utility of the system without DC assistance has individual points that exceed the converged value with DC assistance, this is not the satisfactory result we want, because at this time, the QoE of the URLLC service is far lower than the service requirement. Furthermore, there is no additional system power consumption without DC assist. Therefore, the utility of the system without DC assistance cannot be higher than that of the system with DC assistance, if the system energy consumption is not considered. Figure 9 depicts the comparison of different optimization goals when the URLLC service has higher priority. Figure 9a shows that the utility of the system with DC assistance is about 0.4 higher than that of the system without DC assistance, which is the same as the previous description. If the additional energy consumption of the system is not considered, the difference will be greater than 0.4. From Figure 9b,c, it can be observed that when there is no DC assistance and the QoE requirement of URLLC service is preferentially met, the throughput of the system is lower than that in Figure 8b, and the QoE of eMBB service is only can reach about 0.9. It can also be observed that the QoE of the eMBB service is closely related to the system throughput. When the QoE of the eMBB service is satisfied, the system throughput is often higher. This is because the eMBB service requires a large

Figure 8: The comparison of optimization goals under the LSTM-D3 QN algorithm with and without dual connectivity assistance while there is priority for eMBB service. (**a**) The comparison of utility; (**b**) the comparison of system throughput; (**c**) the comparison of QoE of eMBB; (**d**) the comparison of QoE of URLLC. bandwidth. When the bandwidth given to the eMBB at one time is plenty, the throughput of the system will also be large. Figure 9d shows that when there is no DC assistance and the QoE requirements of the URLLC service are preferentially met, although the QoE can reach more than 0.95, the QoE of the URLLC service is still more stable with the DC assistance. #### 5.2.3 Simulation Results and Analysis with Different Numbers of Users

Figures 10-13 depict the effects of different numbers of users within the network system on various optimization goals. Figure 10 clearly shows that when the number of users in the system is larger, its utility will be lower. In addition, when the number of users reaches 750, the convergence of the algorithm also becomes not very stable, and it does not really converge until about 5000 iterations. Figure 11 shows that the number of users using DC varies as the number of users in the system increases because the added users include users of both services. In the figure, when the number of users is 700, there are more users using DC than when the number of users is 750. Because our users are randomly distributed, although the number of users is 750, the number of users of the SBS may not be more than the case where the total number of users is 700. The convergence trend of the curve is similar to the utility; when the number of users is 750, there will be an unstable fluctuation after the training convergence. From the perspective of system

Figure 9: The comparison of optimization goals under the LSTM-D3 QN algorithm with and without dual connectivity assistance while there is priority for URLLC service. (**a**) The comparison of utility; (**b**) the comparison of system throughput; (**c**) the comparison of QoE of eMBB; (**d**) the comparison of QoE of URLLC.