The Covering-Assignment Problem for Swarm-Powered <i>Ad Hoc</i> Clouds: A Distributed 3-D Mapping Usecase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The popularity of drones is rapidly increasing across the different sectors of the economy. Aerial capabilities and relatively low costs make drones the perfect solution to improve the efficiency of operations that are typically carried out by humans. Besides automating field operations, drones acting de facto as a swarm can serve as an ad hoc cloud infrastructure built on top of computing and storage resources available across the swarm members and other elements. Even in the absence of Internet connectivity, this cloud can serve the workloads generated by the swarm members and the field agents. By considering the practical example of a swarm-powered 3-D reconstruction application on top of such cloud infrastructure, we present a new optimization problem for the efficient generation and execution of multinode computing workloads subject to data geolocation and clustering constraints. The objective is the minimization of the overall computing times, including both networking delays caused by the interdrone data transmission and computation delays. We prove that the problem is NP-hard and present two combinatorial formulations to model it. Computational results on the solution of the formulations show that one of them can be used to solve, within the configured time-limit, more than 50% of the considered real-world instances involving up to two hundred images and six drones.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".