MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413277737 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3599579

Joint Optimization of UAV Trajectory and Resource Allocation in Multi-UAV-Enabled Wireless Powered Communication Networks Under Max–Min Criterion

2025· article· en· W4413277737 on OpenAlexaff
Tabassum Alam Meem, Hyemin Yu, MinChul Ju

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceJoint (building)TrajectoryResource allocationWirelessTrajectory optimizationResource management (computing)Wireless networkComputer networkResource (disambiguation)Real-time computingDistributed computingTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We consider a wireless powered communication network (WPCN) where several unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) serve as energy transmitters and data collectors for low-powered ground devices (GDs). During the downlink phase, UAVs wirelessly transfer energy to the GDs, allowing them to harvest power for future data transmission. In the subsequent uplink phase, the GDs use the harvested energy to send information back to their corresponding UAVs. Our goal is to optimize system performance by maximizing the minimum throughput achieved among the GDs. We reformulate the original problem as a combination of three interrelated subproblems using a block coordinate descent approach: transmit power optimization of GDs, scheduling, and UAV trajectory optimization. These subproblems are solved iteratively to achieve an optimal solution. By adaptively adjusting UAV trajectories and optimizing scheduling and power distribution, our method ensures efficient energy delivery and reliable data collection. Numerical results confirm that the proposed approach significantly outperforms conventional methods, improving minimum throughput by up to 32.7% and 59.6% compared to fixed scheduling and fixed trajectory approaches, respectively. Furthermore, the adopted Lambert W-based energy harvesting model achieves up to 41% higher harvested energy compared to existing nonlinear energy harvesting models. Our findings underscore the potential of UAV-assisted wireless power transfer in boosting the efficiency and reliability of future wireless communication networks.

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 score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.633

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.266
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207