MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416078278 · doi:10.1109/mcom.001.2500051

Proactive Public Safety in 6G: Leveraging AI and Crowdsourcing for Critical Tasks

2025· article· W4416078278 on OpenAlexaff
Ismaeel Al Ridhawi, Moayad Aloqaily, Haythem Bany Salameh, Mohammad Al Ridhawi, Hussein Al Osman

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrowdsourcingResource allocationEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionThe InternetEdge computingResource (disambiguation)Social mediaResource management (computing)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sixth Generation (6G) networks will create new possibilities to enhance public safety and security standards. The implementation of public safety operations and mission-critical applications requires ultra-fast and resilient communication through uninterrupted heterogeneous networks which integrate terrestrial, aerial and satellite systems. The real-time processing of massive data, decision-making and resource allocation at the edge faces multiple challenges during immediate public safety response scenarios. This article identifies specific obstacles while presenting a new framework which combines crowd-sourced data with advanced Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms to forecast situations needing public safety intervention. Crowd-sourced data is collected from social media activities, mobile devices, digital twins of users in the metaverse, autonomous self-driving vehicles, and data generated from Internet of Everything (IoE) devices. The framework uses blockchain technology to authenticate and verify collected information. Transformer models, generative AI, and Federated Learning (FL) collectively enhance real-time event predictions and enable dynamic resource allocation at the edge. The allocation of communication and edge computing resources to higher-risk areas through cooperative edge devices such as Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) ultimately enables seamless communication and efficient resource allocation for critical tasks.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.274 · 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.

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 venueIEEE Communications MagazineSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207