Height Optimization and Resource Allocation for NOMA Enhanced UAV-Aided Relay Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we investigate the application of the non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) technique into the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) aided relay networks. Specifically, we first incorporate the NOMA protocol with the decode-and-forward (DF) relay protocol to enhance the performance of the cell edge users in a macrocell network. Theoretical analysis indicates that the NOMA-DF-relay protocol outperforms the conventional orthogonal multiple access (OMA) based DF-relay protocol in terms of data rate. To fully exploit the advantages of the proposed protocol, we formulate a joint UAV height optimization, channel allocation, and power allocation problem with the objective to maximize the total data rate of the cell edge users under the coverage of the UAV. For solving the formulated problem effectively, we first analyze its property and employ the golden section method to propose a general framework to obtain the optimal height of the UAV. Then, we design a low-complexity iterative algorithm to solve the joint channel-and-power allocation problem based on the matching theory and the Lagrangian dual decomposition technique. Finally, simulation results demonstrate that the NOMA-DF-relay protocol is superior to the OMA-DF-relay protocol even when the system parameters are not optimized, and the proposed algorithms can further significantly improve the network performance in comparison with the other 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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 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".