MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921642927 · doi:10.1109/lwc.2019.2904034

Placement and Power Allocation for NOMA-UAV Networks

2019· article· en· W2921642927 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNomaComputer scienceBase stationPower (physics)Cellular networkReal-time computingScheme (mathematics)Path lossComputer networkPath (computing)Convex optimizationWirelessRegular polygonTelecommunications linkTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can be used as flying base stations to provide ubiquitous connections for mobile devices in over-crowded areas. On the other hand, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) is a promising technique to support massive connectivity. In this letter, the placement and power allocation (PA) are jointly optimized to improve the performance of the NOMA-UAV network. Since the formulated joint optimization problem is non-convex, the location of the UAV is first optimized, with the total path loss from the UAV to users minimized. Then, the PA for NOMA is optimized using the optimal location of the UAV to maximize the sum rate of the network. Simulation results are presented to show the effectiveness and efficiency of the proposed scheme for NOMA-UAV networks.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.614
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.214
Teacher spread0.205 · 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