MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2785748815 · doi:10.1109/pimrc.2017.8292241

Delay analysis for drone-based vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks

2017· article· en· W2785748815 on OpenAlexaff
Hafez Seliem, Mohamed H. Ahmed, Reza Shahidi, Mohamed Shehata

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDroneVehicular ad hoc networkComputer scienceNetwork packetWireless ad hoc networkProbabilistic logicComputer networkTelecommunicationsWirelessArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) or drones in Vehicular Ad-hoc Networks (VANETs) has started to attract attention. This paper proposes a mathematical framework to determine the minimum drone density (maximum separation distance between two adjacent drones) that stochastically limits the worst case for the vehicle-to-drone packet delivery delay. In addition, it proposes a drones-active service (DAS) that is added to the location service in a VANET to obtain the required number of active drones based on the current vehicular density while satisfying a probabilistic requirement for vehicle-to-drone packet delivery delay. Our goal is boosting VANET communications using infrastructure drones to achieve the minimum vehicle-to-drone packet delivery delay. We are interested in two-way highway VANET networks with low vehicular density. The simulation results show the accuracy of our mathematical framework and reflect the relation between the vehicle-to-drone packet delivery delay and the drone density.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations23
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207