Underlay Drone Cell for Temporary Events: Impact of Drone Height and Aerial Channel Environments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Providing seamless connection to a large number of devices is one of the biggest challenges for the Internet of Things (IoT) networks. Using a drone as an aerial base station (ABS) to provide coverage to devices or users on ground is envisaged as a promising solution for IoT networks. In this paper, we consider a communication network with an underlay ABS to provide coverage for a temporary event, such as a sporting event or a concert in a stadium. Using stochastic geometry, we propose a general analytical framework to compute the uplink and downlink coverage probabilities for both the aerial and the terrestrial cellular system. Our framework is valid for any aerial channel model for which the probabilistic functions of line-of-sight (LOS) and non-LOS links are specified. The accuracy of the analytical results is verified by Monte Carlo simulations considering two commonly adopted aerial channel models. Our results show the nontrivial impact of the different aerial channel environments (i.e., suburban, urban, dense urban, and high-rise urban) on the uplink and downlink coverage probabilities and provide design guidelines for best ABS deployment height.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".