MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313291221 · doi:10.1109/twc.2022.3231408

Joint Offloading Decision and Trajectory Design for UAV-Enabled Edge Computing With Task Dependency

2022· article· en· W4313291221 on OpenAlexafffund
Bin Xu, Zhufang Kuang, Jie Gao, Lian Zhao, Chutian Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityCarleton University
FundersCentral South University of Forestry and TechnologyNatural Science Foundation of Hunan ProvinceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceCoordinate descentBenchmark (surveying)Mathematical optimizationResource allocationTrajectoryTrajectory optimizationOptimization problemConvex optimizationTask (project management)Block (permutation group theory)Mobile edge computingEdge computingEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionResource management (computing)Distributed computingRegular polygonOptimal controlArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmMathematicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate the joint problem of task offloading, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) trajectory design, and resource allocation for UAV-enabled edge computing, considering and highlighting the dependency among different tasks. The corresponding optimization problem, which is a mixed-integer problem, is formulated. To solve this problem, we propose an iterative method based on Block Coordinate Descent (BCD) to decompose the original problem into two subproblems. Given the offloading decision and resource allocation, the subproblem of UAV trajectory optimization is solved by convex optimization methods. Then, given the UAV trajectory, the subproblem of task offloading decision and the corresponding resource allocation is solved by dynamic programming and convex optimization methods. Simulation results show that our proposed method can significantly reduce energy consumption compared to the benchmark 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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations55
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207