MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046185594 · doi:10.1109/icc40277.2020.9148694

Resource Allocation for Energy Efficient NOMA UAV Network under Imperfect CSI

2020· article· en· W3046185594 on OpenAlexaff
Haijun Zhang, Jianmin Zhang, Keping Long, Arumugam Nallanathan, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)Telecommunications linkEfficient energy useMathematical optimizationBase stationNomaResource allocationChannel state informationConvex optimizationUser equipmentReal-time computingWirelessComputer networkRegular polygonEngineeringTelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are developing rapidly owing to flexible deployment and access services as air base stations. However, the energy efficiency of the UAVs cells using non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) with imperfect channel state information (CSI) hasnt been well studied yet. Therefore, we maximize energy efficiency in the downlink NOMA UAV network considering imperfect CSI between the UAV and users. Resource allocation schemes including user scheduling as well as power allocation are designed for system energy efficiency optimization. Because of the non-convexity of optimization function with an probability constraint for imperfect CSI, the original problem is converted into a nonprobability problem and then decoupled into two convex subproblems by successive convex approximation method. First, a user scheduling method is applied in the two-side matching of users and subchannels by the difference of convex programming. Then based on user scheduling, the energy efficiency in UAV cells is optimized through a suboptimal power allocation algorithm. The simulation results prove that our proposed algorithm is more effective compared with existing resource allocation schemes.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.981
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207