Joint Trajectory Planning, Application Placement, and Energy Renewal for UAV-Assisted MEC: A Triple-Learner-Based Approach
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
In this article, an energy-efficient scheduling problem for multiple unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-assisted mobile-edge computing (MEC) is studied. In the considered model, UAVs act as mobile edge servers to provide computing services to end-users with task offloading requests. Unlike existing works, we allow UAVs to determine not only their trajectories but also the decisions of whether returning to the depot for replenishing energies and updating application placements (due to their limited batteries and storage capacities). With the aim of maximizing the long-term energy efficiency of all UAVs, i.e., the total amount of offloaded tasks computed by all UAVs over their total energy consumption, a joint optimization of UAVs’ trajectory planning, energy renewal, and application placement is formulated. Taking into account the underlying cooperation and competition among intelligent UAVs, we reformulate such optimization problem as three coupled multiagent stochastic games. Since the prior environment information is unavailable to UAVs, we propose a novel triple-learner-based reinforcement learning (TLRL) approach, integrating a trajectory learner, an energy learner, and an application learner, for reaching equilibriums. Moreover, we analyze the convergence and the complexity of the proposed solution. Simulations are conducted to evaluate the performance of the proposed TLRL approach, and demonstrate its superiority over counterparts.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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