MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic Scheduling for Quality of Information Maximization in Location-aware Opportunistic Mobile Crowdsensing

2023· article· en· W4388076190 on OpenAlexaff
Mozhang Guo, Xianbin Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Crowdsensing and Crowdsourcing
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrowdsensingComputer scienceScheduling (production processes)MaximizationMobile computingComputer networkReal-time computingDistributed computingMathematical optimizationComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent emergence of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) technology has brought up enormous potential applications. However, operating the underlying UAV networks requires an accurate understanding of the dynamic 3D wireless spectrum conditions in real-time. To achieve this, Opportunistic mobile crowdsensing (OCS) has been considered as a cost-effective solution by recruiting mobile devices for spectrum information gathering. Due to a lack of sensing and transmission coordination, existing OCS approaches cannot gather spectrum information with sufficient quality in the data acquisition process, leading to deteriorated UAV network operation performance. To address this challenge, we propose a novel dynamic scheduling mechanism that maximizes the quality of information (QoI) in the location-aware OCS scheme. By jointly allocating sensing and transmission resources, this approach achieves QoI maximization by reducing the OCS communication and sensing overhead. The problem is formulated as a stochastic network optimization problem and uses the Lyapunov optimization theory for solution development. We propose a decentralized sensing scheduling and a centralized dynamic transmission scheduling mechanism to solve the sub-problems. To evaluate the performance of our proposed solution, we conduct extensive simulations and compare our results against other crowdsensing schemes. The simulation results demonstrate the convergence and performance of the proposed approach and show that it outperforms other crowdsensing schemes. The proposed approach maximizes the QoI by dynamically allocating resources while minimizing the communication and sensing overhead.

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 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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.454

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMobile Crowdsensing and CrowdsourcingFrench-language works237,207