MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3119550488 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2021.3049367

Trajectory Design for the Aerial Base Stations to Improve Cellular Network Performance

2021· article· en· W3119550488 on OpenAlexaff
Behzad Khamidehi, E.S. Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBackhaul (telecommunications)Base stationMathematical optimizationComputer scienceCellular networkOptimization problemTransmitter power outputResource allocationTrajectory optimizationTrajectoryConvex optimizationChannel (broadcasting)Computer networkOptimal controlRegular polygonMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerial base stations (ABSs) have shown significant potential to improve cellular networks' performance due to their high mobility and on-demand deployment. In this paper, the trajectory optimization problem for a multi-ABS network is investigated. The objective is to maximize the minimum data rate of the cell-edge mobile users while the power constraint of the ABSs, including both propulsion and signal transmission powers, the backhaul link capacity constraint, and the collision avoidance constraint, are taken into account. To reach this goal, first, based on the modified K-means approach, the ABSs and users are partitioned into different clusters so that their associated ABS serve the users of each cluster. Afterward, the ABSs need to find an efficient trajectory optimization and resource allocation scheme to support the users. To solve this challenging problem, we convert the main trajectory optimization and resource allocation problem into three sub-problems: power allocation sub-problem, joint ABS-user association and sub-channel assignment sub-problem, and trajectory optimization sub-problem. Then, using the successive convex approximation approach, an efficient algorithm is proposed, which iteratively solves these sub-problems. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm converges fast and improves the network's data rate while it satisfies all the required constraints.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations26
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207