Multi-UAV Enabled Integrated Sensing and Wireless Powered Communication: A Robust Multi-Objective Approach
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The integration of sensing and communication functions is a fundamental paradigm for enabling robust and resource-efficient unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-assisted wireless networks. This paper addresses the optimization of integrated sensing and communication (ISAC) systems in UAV-aided wireless networks featuring wireless power transfer (WPT). We propose a novel architecture wherein multiple UAV-based radars concurrently serve multiple clusters of energy-limited communication users while performing sensing tasks. Initially, radars sense the environment, enabling users to harvest and store energy from radar transmissions. Subsequently, this stored energy facilitates uplink communication from nodes to UAVs. Our multi-objective design problem optimizes UAV trajectories, radar transmit waveforms, radar receive filters, time scheduling, and uplink powers to enhance both radar and communication system performance. Incorporating user location uncertainty, we formulate a robust non-convex optimization problem. To address this, we employ an alternating optimization approach, complemented by fractional programming, S-procedure, and majorization-minimization (MM) techniques. Numerical examples illustrate the efficacy of our method across diverse scenarios.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 it