MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409874261 · doi:10.1139/dsa-2024-0049

Optimization Research on UAV Semantic Communication System Based on SVD-MADRL

2025· article· en· W4409874261 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lili Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueDrone Systems and Applications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Computational Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSingular value decompositionComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNatural language processing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The study optimizes the flight trajectory and power of multiple unmanned aerial vehicles with the deep deterministic policy gradient algorithm, and constructs a multi-unmanned aerial vehicle semantic communication optimization model based on singular value decomposition and multi-agent deep reinforcement learning. The results show that the relay system developed in this study is better than traditional algorithms in terms of coverage and flight path, with a coverage rate of up to 90%. Moreover, the energy consumption of the model to complete task transmission is only 2835 joules, and the delay time is only 15 seconds. In addition, compared with traditional algorithms, the semantic communication optimization model constructed in this study performs the best in terms of total reward, data collection efficiency, and accuracy. It has strong stability and convergence ability, with an accuracy close to 1, significantly improving the accuracy and efficiency of unmanned aerial vehicle communication transmission. The effectiveness of the two models designed for research is relatively high, both superior to traditional methods, providing a theoretical basis for optimizing the overall performance of unmanned aerial vehicle communication. It is of great significance in promoting the widespread application of unmanned aerial vehicle technology.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDrone Systems and ApplicationsSame topicAdvanced Computational Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207