MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785141402 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2018.8377340

Efficient 3D aerial base station placement considering users mobility by reinforcement learning

2018· preprint· en· W2785141402 on OpenAlexaff
Rozhina Ghanavi, Elham Kalantari, Maryam Sabbaghian, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu, Abbas Yongaçoğlu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinforcement learningBase stationComputer scienceQuality of servicePosition (finance)Computer networkWireless networkReal-time computingBase (topology)Cellular networkService (business)WirelessDistributed computingArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers an aerial base station (aerial-BS) assisted terrestrial network where user mobility is taken into account. User movement changes the network dynamically which may result in performance loss. To avoid this loss, guarantee a minimum quality-of-service (QoS) and possibly increase the QoS, we add an aerial-BS to the network. For fair comparison between the conventional terrestrial network and the aerial-BS assisted one, we keep the total number of BSs identical in both networks. Obtaining the best performance in such networks highly depends on the optimal placement of the aerial-BS. To this end, an algorithm which can rely on general and realistic assumptions and can decide where to go based on the past experiences is required. The proposed approach for this goal is based on a discounted reward reinforcement learning which is known as Q-learning. Simulation results show this method provides an effective placement strategy which increases the QoS of wireless networks when it is needed and promises to find the optimum position of the aerial-BS in discrete environments.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207