Underlay Drone Cell for Temporary Events: Impact of Drone Height and Aerial Channel Environments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it