Trajectory Design and Resource Allocation for Multi-UAV Networks: Deep Reinforcement Learning Approaches
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The future mobile communication system is expected to provide ubiquitous connectivity and unprecedented services over billions of devices. The unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), which is prominent in its flexibility and low cost, emerges as a significant network entity to realize such ambitious targets. In this work, novel machine learning-based trajectory design and resource allocation schemes are presented for a multi-UAV communications system. In the considered system, the UAVs act as aerial Base Stations (BSs) and provide ubiquitous coverage. In particular, with the objective to maximize the system utility over all served users, a joint user association, power allocation and trajectory design problem is presented. To solve the problem caused by high dimensionality in state space, we first propose a machine learning-based strategic resource allocation algorithm which comprises of reinforcement learning and deep learning to design the optimal policy of all the UAVs. Then, we also present a multi-agent deep reinforcement learning scheme for distributed implementation without knowing a priori knowledge of the dynamic nature of networks. Extensive simulation studies are conducted and illustrated to evaluate the advantages of the proposed scheme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it