Latency Analysis of Drone-Assisted C-V2X Communications for Basic Safety and Co-Operative Perception Messages
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drone-assisted radio communication is revolutionizing future wireless networks, including sixth-generation (6G) and beyond, by providing unobstructed, line-of-sight links from air to terrestrial vehicles, enabling robust cellular cehicle-to-everything (C-V2X) communication networks. However, addressing communication latency is imperative, especially when considering autonomous vehicles. In this study, we analyze different types of delay and the factors impacting them in drone-assisted C-V2X networks. We specifically investigate C-V2X Mode 4, where multiple vehicles utilize available transmission windows to communicate the frequently collected sensor data with an embedded drone server. Through a discrete-time Markov model, we assess the medium access control (MAC) layer performance, analyzing the trade-off between data rates and communication latency. Furthermore, we compare the delay between cooperative perception messages (CPMs) and periodically transmitted basic safety messages (BSMs). Our simulation results emphasize the significance of optimizing BSM and CPM transmission intervals to achieve lower average delay as well as utilization of drones’ battery power to serve the maximum number of vehicles in a transmission time interval (TTI). The results also reveal that the average delay heavily depends on the packet arrival rate while the processing delay varies with the drone occupancy and state-transition rates for both BSM and CPM packets. Furthermore, an optimal policy approximates a threshold-based policy in which the threshold depends on the drone utilization and energy availability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".