Optimal Scheduling for Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Networks With Flow-Level Dynamics
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
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Networks have recently attracted great attention as being able to provide convenient and fast wireless connections. One central question is how to allocate a limited number of UAVs to provide wireless services across a large number of regions, where each region has dynamic arriving flows and flows depart from the system once they receive the desired amount of service (referred to as the flow-level dynamic model). In this article, we propose a MaxWeight-type scheduling algorithm taking into account sharp flow-level dynamics that efficiently redirect UAVs across a large number of regions. However, in our considered model, each flow experiences an independent fading channel and will immediately leave the system once it completes its service, which makes its evolution quite different from the traditional queueing model for wireless networks. This poses significant challenges in our performance analysis. Nevertheless, we incorporate sharp flow-dynamic into the Lyapunov-drift analysis framework, and successfully establish both throughput and heavy-traffic optimality of the proposed algorithm. Extensive simulations are performed to validate the effectiveness of our proposed algorithm.
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