MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765468546 · doi:10.1109/access.2017.2765498

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles as Store-Carry-Forward Nodes for Vehicular Networks

2017· article· en· W2765468546 on OpenAlexaff
Wissam Fawaz, Ribal Atallah, Chadi Assi, Maurice Khabbaz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVehicular ad hoc networkComputer scienceComputer networkNetwork packetWireless ad hoc networkContext (archaeology)Path (computing)TelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A fully connected vehicular ad hoc network (VANET) establishes a strong foundation for the development of smart cities, where one of the main objectives is the improvement of the welfare of commuting passengers. The availability of a multi-hop path across a VANET system, through vehicle-to-vehicle communication, depends mainly on the vehicular density and the willingness of vehicles to cooperate with one another. This paper proposes to minimize the path availability's dependence on vehicular density and cooperation, by utilizing unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). Particularly, this paper explores, both mathematically as well as through an extensive simulation study, the advantages of exploiting UAVs as store-carry-forward nodes so as to enhance the availability of a connectivity path as well as to reduce the end-to-end packet delivery delay. The obtained results shed clear light on the benefits emanating from the coupling of UAVs with vehicles in the context of a highly promising, innovative, and hybrid vehicular networking architecture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207