MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3133186223 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2021.3059022

Civil Aircrafts Augmented Space–Air–Ground-Integrated Vehicular Networks: Motivation, Breakthrough, and Challenges

2021· article· en· W3133186223 on OpenAlexaff
Qian Chen, Weixiao Meng, Shuxun Li, Cheng Li, Hsiao‐Hwa Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSpace (punctuation)Atmospheric modelAerospace engineeringAeronauticsTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to meet mobile users’ unprecedented communication demands and the goal of global seamless communication, space–air–ground-integrated networks (SAGINs) have attracted lots of attention in recent years. The existing works related on air segment mainly discussed unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), airships, and balloons near the space. However, they neglected many other valuable resources, such as civil aircrafts (CAs). Moreover, communication problems for remote areas and emergency scenarios (such as disasters and hot-spot areas) have not been solved thoroughly. Motivated by these facts, we introduce CAs to enhance the current SAGIN and present a novel architecture called “CAs augmented space–air–ground-integrated vehicular networks” (CAA-SAGIVNs). The proposed network architecture makes breakthrough in three main aspects: 1) a normal network architecture; 2) collaboration with multiple sky access platforms (SAPs); and 3) service-oriented fair allocation. Although CAA-SAGIVN can bring out many benefits, it also faces more challenges due to its high mobility and cross-layer characteristics. Therefore, we provide an exhaustive review of state-of-the-art works on modeling, mobility management, solutions of service-oriented allocation in SAGIN. On the basis of the preliminary investigation and discussion, some open issues are identified as possible future research directions.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations29
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207