Optimal Cooperative Relaying and Power Control for IoUT Networks With Reinforcement Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internet of Underwater Things (IoUT) consists of numerous sensor nodes distributed in an underwater area for sensing, collecting, processing information, and sending related messages to the data processing center. However, the characteristics of the underwater environment will bring strict limitations on communication coverage and power scarcity to IoUT networks. Applying cooperative communications to IoUT networks can expand the communication range and alleviate power shortages. In this article, we investigate the cooperative communication problem in a power-limited cooperative IoUT system and propose a reinforcement learning-based underwater relay selection strategy. Specifically, we first determine the optimal transmit powers of the source node and the selected underwater relay to maximize the end-to-end signal-to-noise ratio of the system. Then, we formulate the underwater cooperative relaying process as a Markov process and apply reinforcement learning to obtain an effective underwater relay selection strategy. The simulation results show that the performance of the proposed scheme outperforms that of the equal transmit power settings under the same conditions. In addition, the proposed deep Q-network-based underwater relay selection strategy improves the communication efficiency compared with the Q-learning-based strategy, and the number of iterations needed for convergence can be effectively reduced.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".