MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Blockchain-based Collision Avoidance Access Protocol for UAV Swarm

2023· article· en· W4386360568 on OpenAlexaff
Gongming Lin, Wei Wang, Mengying Wang, Qiang Ye, Qihui Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersJiangsu Provincial Key Research and Development ProgramNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaChina Association for Science and Technology
KeywordsComputer scienceBottleneckAlohaComputer networkProtocol (science)ThroughputAccess controlSwarm behaviourChannel (broadcasting)Collision avoidanceCollisionKey (lock)Random accessDistributed computingComputer securityWirelessEmbedded systemTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The explosive growth of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) pose more and more aerial and communication resources, making efficient spectrum access control a key bottleneck for UAV swarm applications. Conventionally, the absence of a centralized authority may cause lots of spectrum collisions among UAVs, which not only wastes the spectrum resources, but also causes long access delay. To address this challenge, we propose a blockchain-based access protocol that can effectively mitigate the access collisions among a distributed UAV swarm in high dynamic scenarios Specifically, we design a collision avoidance access mechanism by leveraging blockchain and hash access. We also analyze the performance of the proposed protocol and compare it with the slot multi-channel Aloha protocol. Simulation results demonstrate that the proposed protocol can effectively reduce the spectrum access collisions and is superior to slot multi-channel Aloha in access success rate, throughput, and average access delay.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.297 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207