MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401747727 · doi:10.1109/taes.2024.3447636

Causal CSI-Based Trajectory Design and Power Allocation for UAV-Enabled Wireless Networks Under Average Rate Constraints: A Constrained Reinforcement Learning Approach

2024· article· en· W4401747727 on OpenAlexafffund
Hyemin Yu, Hong‐Chuan Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrajectoryWirelessReinforcement learningComputer scienceWireless networkPower (physics)Mathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceControl (management)TelecommunicationsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With their flexible deployment and cost-effectiveness, unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) are unlocking possibilities for connectivity and services in future wireless networks. The mobility of UAVs can be leveraged through trajectory design to satisfy the stringent rate requirement of users. Most existing works on UAV trajectory design focus on scenarios where noncausal channel state information (CSI) is available to the UAV in advance. In this article, we investigate the trajectory design and power allocation based on causal CSI to maximize the sum-rate under the constraint on average rate per user. Since the constraint on average rate must be met over an extended period, we formulate a constrained Markov decision process problem and solve it by adopting the Lagrangian relaxation technique. Thereby, we propose a model-free reinforcement learning algorithm, where the real-time signal strength measured by the UAV along its current location is used to design the trajectory and allocate power optimally. To further improve the efficiency of the learning algorithm, we introduce the water-filling algorithm and the idea of action elimination, by which the size of state/action spaces is reduced. For real-world applications, we provide an online fine-tuning algorithm for real-time policy adjustments to mitigate environmental changes and/or model inaccuracies. Simulation results show that the proposed algorithm outperforms benchmark methods and satisfies the constraint on average rate per user upon convergence.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic SystemsSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207