Joint Communication and Computation Resource Scheduling of a UAV-Assisted Mobile Edge Computing System for Platooning Vehicles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Connected and autonomous vehicles (CAVs) are recently envisioned to provide a tremendous social impact, while they put forward a much higher requirement for both vehicular communication and computation capacities to process resource-intensive applications. In this paper, we study unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-assisted mobile edge computing (MEC) for a platoon of wireless power transmission (WPT)-enabled vehicles. Our objective is to maximize the system-wide computation capacity under both communication and computation resource constraints. We incorporate the coupled effects of the platooning vehicles and the flying UAV, air-to-ground (A2G) and ground-to-air (G2A) communications, onboard computing and energy harvesting into a joint scheduling optimization model of communication and computation resources. To tackle the resulting optimization problem, we propose a successive convex programming method based on a second-order convex approximation, in which feasible search directions are obtained by solving a sequence of quadratic programming subproblems and used to generate feasible points that can approach a local optimum. We also theoretically prove the feasibility and convergence of the proposed method. Moreover, simulation results are provided to validate the effectiveness of our proposed method and demonstrate its superior performance over other conventional 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".