Joint UAV Position and Power Optimization for Accurate Regional Localization in Space-Air Integrated Localization Network
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate location estimation of Internet-of-Things (IoT) devices within an Area of Interest (AoI) is a challenging issue, especially in a global navigation satellite system (GNSS)-constrained environment. In this article, we present a space-air integrated localization network (SAILN) architecture to exploit the advantages of the unmanned-aerial-vehicle (UAV)-based localization through joint position and power optimization (JPPO) strategies. In SAILN, UAVs can utilize their flexible movement to obtain the line-of-sight (LOS) path with a high probability, thereby providing the potential IoT devices in the AoI with supplementary localization information. The JPPO of UAVs aims to improve the regional localization accuracy for the entire AoI, considering the no-fly-zone (NFZ) and the total energy constraint. We propose the average localization accuracy increment (ALAI) of the sampling points in the AoI as the metric to measure the performance of SAILN compared with that of only satellites, which is regarded as the objective to formulate the JPPO problems for UAV operations in both static and dynamic SAILN. The intractable problems can be resolved by the pure genetic algorithm (PGA) that has a low computational cost and unique features suiting the JPPO of UAVs. Then, by taking advantage of the ALAI convexity to the UAVs' power, we propose a power reallocation-based two-step algorithm (PRTSA) to further explore an improved JPPO solution. Simulation results validate that the proposed PRTSA can obtain a higher localization accuracy for the entire AoI than the PGA and the other straightforward baselines.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".