MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3187931755 · doi:10.1109/tgcn.2021.3101200

Energy-Efficient Resource Allocation in Multi-UAV Networks With NOMA

2021· article· en· W3187931755 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Green Communications and Networking · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTelecommunications linkComputer scienceNomaTransmission (telecommunications)Resource allocationTransmitter power outputMathematical optimizationOptimization problemReal-time computingWirelessEnergy (signal processing)Path lossPower (physics)Computer networkTransmitterMathematicsTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)Algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the energy efficiency (EE) optimization in a wireless communication network where multiple UAVs serve different types of devices, namely, information receivers (IRs) and energy receivers (ERs). The UAVs transmit power signals towards the ERs, and then enable data transmission to IRs on the downlink and from ERs on the uplink with non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA). The optimization problem to maximize the overall EE is formulated and solved using Lagrangian optimization and gradient-descent methods. The optimization is decomposed into two sub-problems. Firstly, by connecting the path loss of the devices’ channels with their rate demands, the UAVs’ optimal positions are obtained. Then, based on the obtained UAVs’ optimal positions and a closed-form expression for the EE, a resource allocation aiming to maximize EE is developed. For the simulations, two main scenarios for single and multiple UAVs are considered. Numerical results and comparisons are provided. In particular, for the single-UAV scenario, the results show an enhancement in EE for the operation with NOMA compared with OMA. For the multiple-UAV scenario, several cases depending on different combinations of the devices’ rate requirements are considered. The results show the superiority of NOMA over OMA in all use cases. The results also reveal the effect of considering the devices’ rate requirements on the EE, where the case with equal rate requirements has the best performance.

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.

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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.196 · 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