Distributing UAVs as Wireless Repeaters in Disaster Relief via Group Role Assignment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When an earthquake occurs, disaster relief is an urgent, complex and critical mission. High on the list is communication network recovery within the disaster area. Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are often used in this regard. Some of them are used as collective repeaters to provide the required network coverage. Their timely, efficient, and collaborative deployment to specific locations is a big challenge. To meet this challenge, this paper formalizes and solves the problem of UAV deployment for signal relays via group role assignment (GRA). The minimum spanning tree algorithm is used to model a rapidly deployed optimal relay network. It can help establish the minimum number of relay points necessary to ensure communication stability. In this scenario, UAVs (agents) adopt roles as communication relays. The task of distributing UAVs to relay points can be solved quickly via the assignment process of GRA, which can solve the x-ILP problem with the help of the PuLP package of Python. Results from thousands of experimental simulations indicate that our solutions are effective, robust and practical. The process can be used to establish an optimal, efficient, and collaborative relay network using UAVs. Their rapid deployment can be a significant contribution to earthquake disaster relief.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".