MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Learning for Path Planning and Coverage Mapping in UAV-Assisted Emergency Communications

2020· article· en· W3125208932 on OpenAlexaff
Juaren Steiger, Ning Lu, Sameh Sorour

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotion planningComputer sciencePlan (archaeology)Path (computing)Base stationReal-time computingNode (physics)Path lossOperations researchArtificial intelligenceComputer networkSimulationTelecommunicationsRobotEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a setting in which a rotary-wing unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) acts as an aerial base station to provide emergency communication service to an area of unknown and inhomogeneous user distribution. The UAV has communication with a ground node deployed to the area, which acts as a charging station. We are interested in two important problems in this setting, namely the path planning and coverage mapping problems. In the path planning problem, the UAV must plan its path starting and ending at the charging station, visiting a series of waypoints over which it hovers to provide coverage to surrounding users. On the other hand, the coverage mapping problem focuses on learning the distribution of user coverage over the area. We highlight the importance of learning this distribution to collect valuable data in an emergency situation. We then propose an online algorithm that simultaneously solves the path planning and coverage mapping problems using a deep learning model. We highlight the interplay and conflicting goals of path planning and coverage mapping, but show through Monte Carlo simulation that, under the correct parameters, the algorithm is able to achieve success on both problems.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207