Downlink Coverage and Rate Analysis of an Aerial User in Vertical Heterogeneous Networks (VHetNets)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we analyze the downlink coverage probability and rate of an aerial user in vertical HetNets (VHetNets) comprising aerial base stations (aerial-BSs) and terrestrial-BSs. The locations of terrestrial-BSs are modeled as an infinite 2-D Poisson Point Process (PPP), while the locations of aerial-BSs are modeled as a finite 2-D Binomial Point Process (BPP). Our cellular-to-air (C2A) channel model incorporates line-of-sight (LoS) and non-LoS transmissions between terrestrial-BSs and a typical aerial user, while we assume LoS transmissions for all aerial links. We assume that the aerial user is associated with an aerial-BS or terrestrial-BS that provides the strongest average received power. Using stochastic geometry, we derive exact and approximate expressions of the coverage probability and rate in terms of interference power's Laplace transform. The expressions are simplified assuming only LoS transmissions for the C2A channels. This enables easy-to-compute equations with good accuracy at elevated aerial user heights. We find that aerial users hovering at low altitudes tend to connect to aerial-BSs in denser terrestrial environments. Employing directive beamforming at aerial-BSs guarantees an acceptable performance at the aerial user by reducing interference signals received from the aerial-BSs. In denser terrestrial networks, the performance at the aerial user degrades substantially despite beamforming.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".