MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Computation Offloading and Resource Allocation for Deep Neural Network Inference in UAV Wireless Networks

2025· article· en· W4414539752 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Ali Ismail, Long Bao Le

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche Scientifique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInferenceServerResource allocationComputationWirelessHeuristicLatency (audio)Artificial neural networkWireless network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) can be equipped with relatively strong servers so they can collaboratively perform inference for pre-trained Deep Neural Networks (DNNs), enabling complex recognition tasks based on onboard sensing data such as image and video. Such the collaborative inference is critical for applications where ground communications and computing infrastructure is not available, not secure or costefficient such as those for military, disaster recovery and rescue. Collaborative DNN inference in the UAV wireless network, is, however, challenging because one must decide how the computation load related to different layers of the DNN is distributed among UAVs and how to efficiently allocate both radio and computing resources to facilitate the underlying offloading process. To this end, we formulate the joint DNN layer assignment, radio and computing resource allocation problem as an optimization problem which aims to minimize the total inference latency. To solve this difficult mixed integer and non-linear problem, we employ an alternating optimization technique and develop an efficient algorithm, named LARA. Numerical studies show that LARA performs very well in different studied scenarios and achieves up to 80 % improvement in terms of inference latency compared to other baselines which perform DNN layer assignment and resource allocation in a heuristic manner. Furthermore, LARA achieves up to 43.17 % improvement compared to OULD [13] framework.

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 score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207