MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399728424 · doi:10.1109/tcomm.2024.3415611

Coverage Analysis of Single-Swarm mmWave UAV Networks Under Multiple Types of Blockages

2024· article· en· W4399728424 on OpenAlexaff
Cunyan Ma, Xiaoya Li, Chen He, Jinye Peng, Kun Yang, Z. Jane Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Communications · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersKey Research and Development Projects of Shaanxi ProvinceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceSwarm behaviourElectronic engineeringComputer networkEngineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Millimeter wave (mmWave)-based unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) communication is susceptible to blockages, even from humans. Previous studies that primarily focused only on static blockage may not accurately characterize the system performance. This paper investigates the coverage performance of mmWave UAV networks by jointly considering multiple types of blockages under finite homogeneous Poisson point process and Binomial point process, which are commonly employed in finite area scenarios with random and fixed number of UAVs, respectively. Particularly, we derive the average line-of-sight probability and coverage probability under static, dynamic, and self blockages. Simulations verify our theoretical results, demonstrating that: the above system performance predominantly depends on self-blockage if UAVs are at high altitudes. Conversely, at relatively low altitudes, all three types of blockages impact them, with static blockage being the dominant factor. To avoid self-blockage, UAV height should satisfy <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$h\!\gt \!h_{R}\!+\!\frac {r_{i}}{\tan \varphi _{b}}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>, where <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$h_{R}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is the height of the user equipment (UE), <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$r_{i}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is the two-dimensional distance of the UAV-UE link, <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\varphi _{b}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is the elevation angle between UE and UAV. The required height is proportional to <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$r_{i}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> and increases as distance d between the user and UE decreases, as <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\varphi _{b}$ </tex-math></inline-formula> is proportional to d. The findings help on designing the network parameters. To our best knowledge, this is the first work to analyze the coverage of mmWave UAV networks under multiple types of blockages.

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)0.000
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 score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.494

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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