MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172786112 · doi:10.1016/j.cja.2021.04.025

Green UAV communications for 6G: A survey

2021· article· en· W3172786112 on OpenAlexaff
Xu Jiang, Min Sheng, Nan Zhao, Chengwen Xing, Weidang Lu, Xianbin Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueChinese Journal of Aeronautics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersDalian University of Technology
KeywordsSoftware deploymentWirelessPower consumptionRange (aeronautics)Base stationEnergy consumptionTelecommunicationsComputer scienceEngineeringPower (physics)Real-time computingElectrical engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) have received a wide range of attention for military and commercial applications. Enhanced with communication capability, UAVs are considered to play important roles in the Sixth Generation (6G) networks due to their low cost and flexible deployment. 6G is supposed to be an all-coverage network to provide ubiquitous connections for space, air, ground and underwater. UAVs are able to provide air-borne wireless coverage flexibly, serving as aerial base stations for ground users, as relays to connect isolated nodes, or as mobile users in cellular networks. However, the onboard energy of small UAVs is extremely limited. Thus, UAVs can be only deployed to establish wireless links temporarily. Prolonging the lifetime and developing green UAV communication with low power consumption becomes a critical challenge. In this article, a comprehensive survey on green UAV communications for 6G is carried out. Specifically, the typical UAVs and their energy consumption models are introduced. Then, the typical trends of green UAV communications are provided. In addition, the typical applications of UAVs and their green designs are discussed. Finally, several promising techniques and open research issues are also pointed out.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations198
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChinese Journal of AeronauticsSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207