MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396782862 · doi:10.1109/ojcoms.2024.3398718

Deep Reinforcement Learning for Energy-Efficient Data Dissemination Through UAV Networks

2024· article· en· W4396782862 on OpenAlexafffund
Abubakar Sani Ali, Ahmed A. Al-Habob, Shimaa Naser, Lina Bariah, Octavia A. Dobre, Sami Muhaidat

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsComputer scienceReinforcement learningBenchmark (surveying)Context (archaeology)HeuristicEnergy consumptionFlexibility (engineering)Distributed computingArtificial intelligenceDeep learningBaseline (sea)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unprecedented growth in the number of connected devices has given rise to the Internet-of-Things (IoT) and led to an increasing demand for additional computational and communication resources. Within this context, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) have shown to provide extended coverage, flexibility, and reachability. Motivated by this, in this paper, we develop a UAV-assisted data dissemination framework for IoT networks. To this end, we formulate a joint optimization problem that aims to minimize the total energy expenditure, i.e., the sum of the energy consumed by the UAV and all the spatially-distributed IoT devices. We propose a deep reinforcement learning approach to solve the joint device classification, device association, and path planning optimization problem. In particular, we aim to 1) train a double deep Q-network agent in order to classify devices into two classes, and then using this classification we 2) develop an association algorithm based on the nearest-neighbor heuristic for device association, and 3) develop a path planning algorithm based on the Lin-Kernighan heuristic. Simulation results show that the proposed approach efficiently reduces the energy consumption as compared with the benchmark approaches, i.e., brute force approach and baseline approach. Furthermore, obtained results show that our approach provides a near optimum solution with a fraction of the time required compared to the brute force approach.

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)0.002
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Open Journal of the Communications SocietySame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207