MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184649165 · doi:10.1145/3459955.3460612

UAV based data communication using Wireless Sensor Networks

2021· article· en· W3184649165 on OpenAlexaff
Krishna Murthy Surya Narayanan, Maher Elshakankiri

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless sensor networkEnergy consumptionThroughputNetwork packetRouting (electronic design automation)Computer networkEfficient energy useTransmission (telecommunications)WirelessMaximizationReal-time computingDistributed computingData transmissionTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies various data collection and transmission technologies and the architectures concerning Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) with the aid of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV). The basic communication methodologies between the sensors and the sensor to the UAVs and UAVs to the destination are studied in detail. The architectures that can be used to perform these operations seamlessly and efficiently are explored. The concept of maximizing the efficiency of UAV and WSN by considering numerous impacting factors is studied and a throughput maximization strategy is explored. Different UAV routing mechanisms to decrease the loss in packet data during transmission are considered and an extensive study on this topic is presented. The energy consumption and overall efficiency of the UAV based communication model have been studied in a comparative perspective weighing down the pros and cons of one over the other. An opportunistic communication algorithm gives a more dynamic outlook to the UAV routing problem and also enhances the efficiency of the overall system. Finally, the identified problems in the previous related work are listed and an alternative solution is proposed.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.666
Threshold uncertainty score0.241

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207