CSDNet: causal inference aided handover parameter adjusting effect estimation in cellular networks
Abstract
Due to the growth of densification and multi-band services in emerging cellular networks, the next generation NodeB will confront with a plethora of handover-related Configuration and Optimization Parameters (COPs). Adjusting the handover-related COPs will directly impact the networks Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Thus, accurately estimating the effect of the handover-related COPs adjustment on KPI values and modeling the COP-KPI relationship can provide guidelines for intelligent network management. Existing studies have applied machine learning to model the intricate relationship between COP and KPI, but these methods merely exploit their correlations. In this paper, considering that there exist the causal effects between COPs and KPIs that go beyond the correlation analysis of them, we propose the causal inference aided handover parameter adjusting effect estimation and design the Causal-Stable Decomposition Network (CSDnet). Specifically, we propose the causal-stable deconstructor module based on self-attention mechanism to characterize the complex causality-stability of KPI induced by the COP adjustment. To ensure the training, we propose the gradient matching loss and the consistency constraint loss. Then, we design the stable decoder and the causal decoder that incorporate the causal information into COP-KPI modeling. Extensive experiments on the COP-KPI dataset collected from the real-world cellular networks verify the effectiveness of CSDnet.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Pretraining contamination can silently inflate benchmark performance.
“pretraining contamination can silently inflate benchmark performance, and contamination checks are now part of mainstream LLM evaluation practice [147], [44], [139].”
From Large language models for agentic NetOps and AIOps: Architectures, evaluation, and safety (2027) · cites this paper as [139]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Large language models for agentic NetOps and AIOps: Architectures, evaluation, and safety
Bilal, M., Crowcroft, J., Wang, R., Xu, X., & Dustdar, S. (2027) · Computer Science Review · doi:10.1016/j.cosrev.2026.101075
- Authors
- Hua, X., Li, Q., Zhang, Z., Fan, X., Zhu, L., Yu, R., Zhou, Y., Zhang, Y., Feng, J., Deng, C., & Yuan, X.
- Affiliations
- China Mobile Research Institute (CN)
- Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications (CN)
- Venue
- ICC 2023 - IEEE International Conference on Communications
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2023-05-28
- Pages
- 5304-5309
- ISSN
- 1550-3607 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4387870441
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2
- FWCI
- 1.47
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Communications (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › IPv6, Mobility, Handover, Networks, Security
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software-Defined Networks and 5G
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Electrical and Electronic Engineering › Advanced Wireless Network Optimization
- Keywords
- key performance indicators, causal inference, cellular networks, network densification, self-attention, network management
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review