LLM-Enabled In-Context Learning for Data Collection Scheduling in UAV-Assisted Sensor Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are increasingly being utilized in various private and commercial applications, e.g., traffic control, parcel delivery, and Search and Rescue (SAR) missions. Machine Learning (ML) methods used in UAV-Assisted Sensor Networks (UASNETs) and, especially, in Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) face challenges such as complex and lengthy model training, gaps between simulation and reality, and low sampling efficiency, which conflict with the urgency of emergencies, such as SAR missions. In this paper, an In-Context Learning (ICL)-Data Collection Scheduling (ICLDC) system is proposed as an alternative to DRL in emergencies. The UAV collects sensory data and transmits it to a Large Language Model (LLM), which creates a task description in natural language. From this description, the UAV receives a data collection schedule that must be executed. A verifier ensures safe UAV operations by evaluating the schedules generated by the LLM and overriding unsafe schedules based on predefined rules. The system continuously adapts by incorporating feedback into the task descriptions and using this for future decisions. This method is tested against jailbreaking attacks, where the task description is manipulated to undermine network performance, highlighting the vulnerability of LLMs to such attacks. The proposed ICLDC significantly reduces cumulative packet loss compared to both the DQN and Maximum Channel Gain baselines. ICLDC presents a promising direction for intelligent scheduling and control in UASNETs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".