MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Joint Positioning and Data Communication Provisioning Using 5G Pattern Division Multiple Access (PDMA) Airborne

2024· article· en· W4402157265 on OpenAlexaff
Licheng Zheng, Kim Khoa Nguyen, Mohamed Cheriet

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvisioningComputer scienceDivision (mathematics)Joint (building)Computer networkTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) to provide either precise positioning or high speed, low latency data communication service has recently emerged for a new class of 5G applications. However, the joint optimization of data communication and wireless positioning in a UAV airborne network is challenging because each service has different requirements. Communication services demand high throughput, while positioning services require the establishment of multiple connections simultaneously. Pattern Division Multiple Access (PDMA) is an innovative communication technique based on Non-orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA), which facilitates the sharing of REs (Resource Elements) among multiple users. In this paper, we formulate the joint problem of user-to-UAV association, RE allocation, and transmission power control, aimed to improve the precision of positioning service while meeting the communication constraints. We propose both exact and a Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning (MADRL) algorithm to solve this non-convex optimization. In addition, to address the problem of interference among users, we propose an attentional Multi-agent Deep Deterministic Policy Gradient (MADDPG) approach. Extensive simulations demonstrated that our proposed algorithm can achieve higher positioning accuracy than state-of-the-art solutions while serving more users.

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 score0.865
Threshold uncertainty score0.522

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207