Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Task Assignment and Exploration Optimization for Low Altitude UAV Rescue via Generative AI Enhanced Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that solving the per-slot Lyapunov problem P3 with the hybrid HG-MADDPG algorithm yields the optimal solution to the long-term UAV task-assignment and exploration problem P1, with simulated task-completion latency cuts of…

desk verdict A plausible engineering combo (Hungarian + diffusion MARL for rescue offloading) undermined by an unsupported Lyapunov claim: the paper says solving P3 yields the optimal P1, but P3 only minimizes an upper bound over a subset of the variables. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.13554 v2 pith:J4KZNMC7 submitted 2025-04-18 cs.AI cs.LGcs.RO

Xin Tang , Qian Chen , Wenjie Weng , Chao Jin , Zhang Liu , Jiacheng Wang , Geng Sun , Xiaohuan Li
show 1 more author
Dusit Niyato
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.AIcs.LGcs.RO
keywords UAVrescuetaskassignmentexplorationoptimizationmulti-agentreinforcementlearningLyapunovgenerativediffusionmodelHungarianalgorithmcomputationoffloading
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the joint long-term problem of task assignment and exploration in a low-altitude UAV rescue network—minimizing task completion latency and energy consumption under a long-term energy budget—can be solved online by a per-slot drift-plus-penalty problem. It claims that solving the per-slot problem P3 with the proposed HG-MADDPG algorithm gives the optimal solution of the original problem P1. HG-MADDPG combines a Hungarian-algorithm area selection, which assigns each UAV to a rescue subarea, with a generative diffusion model inside a multi-agent deep deterministic policy gradient, which chooses offloading ratios and GER computing resources. If correct, rescue systems can make per-slot decisions without future channel or mobility information while keeping energy queues stable, with simulated latency reduced by 20.35% over MADDPG and 12.56% over MAPPO.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the virtual energy queue $Q(t_{i+1})=\max\{Q(t_i)+E^{\mathrm{total}}(t_i)-\bar{E}_u,0\}$, whose Lyapunov drift is upper-bounded by $\Theta+Q(t_i)y_k(t_i)$, so P3 minimizes the bound $\Theta+V\mathbb{E}[T^{\mathrm{total}}(t_i)]+Q(t_i)y_k(t_i)$ each slot. The Hungarian area-selection algorithm matches UAVs to subareas using the cost $\|L_u(t_i)-L_b\|+D_b+C_b-e^{\mathrm{rema}}_u(t_i)-f_b$, which reduces each agent's observation to its assigned subarea. The action generator is a denoising diffusion model reversed from Gaussian noise $x_T\sim\mathcal{N}(0,I)$ to a task ratio $x_0$ conditioned on the observation, with mean $\mu_\theta(x_t,\eth,t)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\alpha_t}}(x_t-\frac{\beta_t}{\sqrt{1-\alpha_t}}\epsilon_\theta(x_t,\eth,t))$, replacing the MADDPG actor network.

What would settle it

In a simulation of an unknown rescue area, hide $D_b$, $C_b$, and $f_b$ until a UAV first enters each subarea; if the Hungarian assignment cannot be computed or collapses to random selection without those values, the joint-optimization claim for the exploration half fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Section 4.2 asserts that by solving P3, the optimal solution of P1 is obtained. The argument is that Lyapunov drift-plus-penalty minimization in each slot, with the virtual energy queue $Q(t_i)$, upper-bounds the long-term objective and keeps the queue stable, so the per-slot minimizer of $\Theta + V\mathbb{E}[T^{\mathrm{total}}(t_i)] + Q(t_i)y_k(t_i)$ achieves the long-term optimum. The exploration half is a Hungarian assignment whose cost matrix combines distance to the subarea center, data size, computation intensity, remaining UAV energy, and average GER computing power; the task-assignment half is a diffusion-model actor inside MADDPG that generates offloading ratios and GER selections. Simulations report average latency reductions of 20.35% versus MADDPG and 12.56% versus MAPPO, with queuing energy and task-completion latency staying in a stable range as computing power, GER count, and data size vary.

Load-bearing premise

The Hungarian area-selection cost requires each subarea's data size, computation intensity, and average GER computing power to be known before the UAVs explore those subareas, although the rescue area is assumed to be unknown.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The long-term energy-budget constraint (20a) is replaced by a per-slot queue-stability condition, so no future information about channels or mobility is needed at decision time.
  • Each UAV only observes its Hungarian-assigned subarea, shrinking the observation space of the multi-agent policy and lowering per-agent complexity.
  • The reported 20.35% and 12.56% latency reductions over MADDPG and MAPPO hold when subarea statistics are available for the Hungarian cost matrix.
  • Adjusting the weight $V$ trades task latency against queue stability, letting an operator shift between fast and energy-conserving modes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper treats subarea data size $D_b$, computation intensity $C_b$, and average GER computing power $f_b$ as known when forming the Hungarian cost; a real unknown disaster area would require an additional first-visit sensing step that the paper does not specify.
  • The reported gains may be driven by the Hungarian dimensionality reduction rather than by the diffusion action generator; an ablation that replaces the diffusion actor with a standard Gaussian actor while keeping the Hungarian assignment would isolate the source.
  • A testable extension is to run the same Lyapunov queue and reward in a single-agent DDPG with Hungarian area selection; if latency gains persist, the contribution is the area-selection decomposition rather than multi-agent generative learning.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies joint task assignment and exploration optimization for a low-altitude UAV rescue system in which UAVs, ground-embedded robots (GERs), and airships cooperate. It formulates a long-term mixed-integer nonlinear program P1 that minimizes total task completion latency under an energy budget and mobility/resource constraints, then applies Lyapunov optimization to obtain a per-slot problem P3. The proposed HG-MADDPG algorithm combines a Hungarian-algorithm-based subarea selection with a diffusion-model-enhanced multi-agent deep deterministic policy gradient for task offloading decisions. Simulations compare HG-MADDPG against MADDPG and MAPPO and report reductions in task completion latency of 20.35% and 12.56%, together with more stable queue behavior and exploration trajectories.

Significance. If the claimed derivation were correct, the paper would offer a useful engineering combination of Lyapunov decomposition, Hungarian assignment, and generative-diffusion MARL for UAV-assisted rescue. The manuscript is clearly organized, includes a complexity analysis, and reports parameter sensitivity experiments, which are helpful for reproducibility. However, the central equivalence between P3 and P1 is asserted but not established, the proposed action space omits two of the three variable classes of the original problem, and the Hungarian exploration cost requires information that the unknown-environment scenario does not provide. These are load-bearing gaps, so the stated significance cannot be assessed from the current manuscript. No code or proofs are provided, and the experimental curves lack error bars or statistical tests, further limiting the strength of the empirical claims.

major comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.2, Eq. (28)-(29)] P3 is written as a minimization over F only, whereas P1 and P2 minimize over (F, M, W). The P3 objective still contains Ttota(ti), which by Eqs. (8), (10), and (11) depends on the computation allocation f_{j,u}(ti) and on the trajectory-dependent distances d_{u,j}(ti), and constraints (28f)-(28j) explicitly involve M and W. The paper does not show how M and W are selected inside P3, nor that the choices made by the Hungarian area selection or by the HG-MADDPG actions are optimal for P3. Therefore the statement "By solving P3, the optimal solution of P1 can be obtained" is unsupported. Standard Lyapunov drift-plus-penalty theory provides, under boundedness and Slater-type conditions, an O(1/V) suboptimality bound on the time-average objective, not an exact solution of the original MINLP. At best, Eq. (29) defines a heuristic per-slot policy.
  2. [Section 5.3.2, Eq. (32)] The action of each agent is defined as A_u^i = {m_{u,j}(ti), p_{u,j}(ti)}, where m is the selected GER and p is the offloading ratio. This action set does not include the computation-resource allocation variables M = {f_{j,u}(ti)} or the trajectory variables W = {d_u(ti), L_u(ti)}, even though the conclusion states that HG-MADDPG optimizes "the computation resource allocation, task offloading ratio, and GER selection." Since P3 is supposed to be solved over these variables, the algorithm cannot be the solver of P3 unless the missing variables are set by an external rule, and no such rule is given. The constraints (28f)-(28j) involving M and W are therefore not enforced by any optimization step.
  3. [Section 5.2.2, Eq. (30)] The Hungarian area-selection cost requires per-subarea values of data size D_b, computation intensity C_b, and average GER computing power f_b. In the stated scenario of an unknown disaster area with no prior maps or load information, these quantities are not available before exploration. The paper even claims in Section 5.2.1 that the Hungarian approach "eliminates the need for the agent to acquire the status of all GERs or the task data size across different areas," which contradicts the need for D_b, C_b, and f_b in Eq. (30). Without a clearly stated source for this information, Algorithm 2 cannot be executed, and the exploration half of the claimed joint optimization is not well defined.
  4. [Section 5.3.2, Eq. (33)] The reward is defined as r_u^i = E[V * Ttota + Q(ti) * yk(ti) | Q(ti)], which is a positive cost-like quantity. In a multi-agent deep deterministic policy gradient framework, the agent maximizes the expected discounted sum of rewards, so a positive reward of this form would encourage larger latency and larger queue backlog. The paper does not state that the reward is negated, that the actor minimizes the Q-value, or that Eq. (33) is a cost to be minimized. This sign inconsistency affects the entire RL training update and is not a presentation detail.
  5. [Sections 3.1-3.4 and Contributions] The introduction and contributions promise airship-assisted computing: "An airship is engaged to handle offloaded tasks only when GERs lack sufficient computation resources." However, the system model only defines a U2G channel model in Eqs. (3)-(8); there is no U2A communication model, no airship computation latency model, and no airship resource constraints in P1 or P3. The task latency model in Eqs. (9)-(13) only considers UAV-local and GER execution. The claimed airship offloading capability is therefore absent from the mathematical formulation and from the experiments, so the framework's stated contribution is not supported by the model.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 3.6, constraints (20i)-(20k)] Several UAV constraints are indexed with "∀j∈J" instead of "∀u∈U", e.g., constraints (20i), (20j), and (20k); the same typo appears in (26h)-(26j) and (28h)-(28j).
  2. [Section 6.1, Table 3] Table 3 contains corrupted placeholder glyphs (e.g., "/uni00000013/uni00000015...") in several rows, making some parameter values unreadable.
  3. [Section 5.3.2] The reward in Eq. (33) omits the constant term Θ from the drift upper bound in Eq. (28); if the intent is to use the per-slot upper-bound objective, the expression should be Θ + V*Ttota + Q*yk, and the sign convention relative to reward maximization should be clarified.
  4. [Section 6.2.2] The term "queuing energy" is described verbally as the average difference between the UAV's energy consumption in the current round and the previous episode, but it is not defined by an equation; this makes Fig. 6 difficult to interpret.
  5. [Section 3.6] The text states that one objective is to maximize the task offloading rate, but P1 in Eq. (20) only minimizes task completion latency with an energy budget; no offloading-rate term appears in the objective or in the reported metrics.
  6. [Section 5.2.2, Algorithm 2] The initial label setting α_u = min(C[u][1],...,C[u][B]) with the matching condition C[u][b] ≤ α_u + β_b is nonstandard for the minimization form of the Hungarian algorithm; the feasibility of the labeling and the augmenting-path adjustment rule should be stated precisely.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circularity found; the Lyapunov-to-P3 reduction, Hungarian selection, and GDM actor are not fitted from or identical to their target outputs, though the P3-to-P1 equivalence claim is an unsupported overclaim.

full rationale

The core derivation is not circular. P1 is transformed to per-slot P2 and then to P3 by a Lyapunov drift-plus-penalty upper bound derived in Eq. (27), with the textbook guarantee cited to [47]; P3 is a per-slot surrogate, not a restatement of P1. The Hungarian cost in Eq. (30) uses per-subarea data sizes, computation intensities, and GER computing power as inputs and outputs an assignment; it does not fit the latency and energy results that are later reported. The GDM-based actor and critic are trained by RL rewards, and the headline 20.35% and 12.56% latency reductions are empirical comparisons to MADDPG and MAPPO, not quantities forced by construction. Self-citations [5], [9], and [21] describe prior related frameworks and experiment parameters, but the load-bearing Lyapunov argument cites the external Neely monograph [47] and the diffusion model cites DDPM [50], so no load-bearing claim reduces to the authors' own unverified prior work. The serious defect is the Section 4.2 statement, 'By solving P3, the optimal solution of P1 can be obtained': P3 minimizes over F only, while its objective Ttota(ti) and constraints still depend on M and W, and Eq. (29) is not computable from F alone. This is a mathematical overclaim or derivation gap, not a self-definitional or fitted-input circularity, because P3 is not identical to P1 by construction and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Score 1 reflects only the presence of minor non-load-bearing self-citations and the derivation-gap concern; no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced; the virtual energy queue Q(t_i) is a standard algorithmic device from Lyapunov optimization, not a postulate about the world. The main ledger items are the tuned hyperparameters and several domain assumptions about information availability and task divisibility that the central claim depends on.

free parameters (7)
  • Lyapunov weight V = 0.5 in main simulation runs; varied in Fig. 6(a)
    Balances task latency against energy-queue penalty in the drift-plus-penalty objective; no principled selection rule is given.
  • GDM denoising steps = 5
    Chosen as optimal in Fig. 5(a) by comparing reward curves.
  • Training batch size = 300
    Chosen as optimal in Fig. 5(b).
  • Actor-critic learning rate = 1e-4
    Chosen as optimal in Fig. 5(c).
  • Discount factor = 0.9
    Set in Section 6.1 as a hyperparameter.
  • Exploration rate and decay = epsilon_0 = 0.9, decay = 1e-4
    Set in Section 6.1; used for MADDPG-style exploration.
  • Implicit weights in Hungarian cost = Unit weights for distance, data size, remaining energy, and GER power
    Eq (30) combines heterogeneous quantities linearly without normalization or stated units; the relative weights are ad hoc.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Lyapunov drift-plus-penalty theorem (Neely [47]) applies, and the queue stability condition Eq (26k) holds automatically.
    Invoked in Section 4.2 to justify P2 and P3; boundedness of y_k(t_i) is asserted, not verified under the proposed energy model and constraints.
  • domain assumption Tasks can be split continuously between UAV local computing and a GER via offloading ratio ς in [0,1], and result download delay is negligible.
    Eqs (9)-(13) rely on arbitrary continuous splits and ignore downlink time; real CNN inference tasks may not permit such splits.
  • ad hoc to paper Per-subarea statistics (data size D_b, computation intensity C_b, GER computing power f_b) are available before area selection.
    Eq (30) uses these values in the Hungarian cost, but the scenario is an unknown disaster area; no sensing or prediction mechanism is provided.
  • domain assumption Airships always cover all UAVs and provide reliable A2A and U2A communication.
    Section 3.1 assumes every UAV stays inside airship range and that airship links are always available, which is idealized for a disaster zone.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Task Assignment and Exploration Optimization for Low Altitude UAV Rescue via Generative AI Enhanced Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/J4KZNMC7

@misc{pith2026250413554,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Task Assignment and Exploration Optimization for Low Altitude UAV Rescue via Generative AI Enhanced Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/J4KZNMC7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.13554}
}
read the original abstract

The integration of emerging uncrewed aerial vehicles (UAVs) with artificial intelligence (AI) and ground-embedded robots (GERs) has transformed emergency rescue operations in unknown environments. However, the high computational demands often exceed a single UAV's capacity, making it difficult to continuously provide stable high-level services. To address this, this paper proposes a cooperation framework involving UAVs, GERs, and airships. The framework enables resource pooling through UAV-to-GER (U2G) and UAV-to-airship (U2A) links, offering computing services for offloaded tasks. Specifically, we formulate the multi-objective problem of task assignment and exploration as a dynamic long-term optimization problem aiming to minimize task completion time and energy use while ensuring stability. Using Lyapunov optimization, we transform it into a per-slot deterministic problem and propose HG-MADDPG, which combines the Hungarian algorithm with a GDM-based multi-agent deep deterministic policy gradient. Simulations demonstrate significant improvements in offloading efficiency, latency, and system stability over baselines.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.13554 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. System model. First, the GER computing power distribution map [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The decomposition process of the optimization problem. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Architecture of HG-MADDPG. ⃝1 Environmental observation, the HG-MADDPG makes each agent only needs to focus on the exploration subarea it selects, which reduces the dimension of the agent’s observation space. ⃝2 Action generation, the HG-MADDPG designs the inverse diffusion process of GDM to replace the action network, which can generate the optimal decision in dynamic environment. ⃝3 Interaction between the agent a… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Convergence comparison of different algorithms. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The reward of different denoising steps, batch sizes, and learning rates. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Queuing energy of different weighting factor [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Stability of task completion latency under different data sizes, computing powers, and number of GERs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Task completion latency of various algorithms under the condition of ensuring successful task completion. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Exploration optimization and GER distribution. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. UAVs Meet Agentic AI: A Multidomain Survey of Autonomous Aerial Intelligence and Agentic UAVs

    cs.RO 2025-06 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A narrative survey defines 'agentic UAVs' as drones with perception, cognition, control, and communication layers and catalogs applications and challenges across eight domains.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [21]

    Dnn task assignment in uav networks: A generative ai enhanced multi-agent reinforcement learning approach,

    X. Tang, Q. Chen, W. Weng, B. Liao, J. Wang, X. Cao, and X. Li, “Dnn task assignment in uav networks: A generative ai enhanced multi-agent reinforcement learning approach,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [9]

    Dnn partitioning, task offloading, and resource allocation in dynamic vehicular networks: A lyapunov-guided diffusion-based reinforcement learning approach,

    Z. Liu, H. Du, J. Lin, Z. Gao, L. Huang, S. Hosseinalipour, and D. Niyato, “Dnn partitioning, task offloading, and resource allocation in dynamic vehicular networks: A lyapunov-guided diffusion-based reinforcement learning approach,” IEEE Transac- tions on Mobile Computing, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [1]

    Priori- tized information bottleneck theoretic framework with distributed online learning for edge video analytics,

    Z. Fang, S. Hu, J. Wang, Y. Deng, X. Chen, and Y. Fang, “Priori- tized information bottleneck theoretic framework with distributed online learning for edge video analytics,” IEEE Transactions on Networking, 2025

    work page 2025

  4. [2]

    Enhancing resiliency of integrated space-air- ground-sea networks with renewable energies: A use case after the 2023 t\

    B. Karaman, I. Basturk, S. Taskin, F. Kara, E. Zeydan, and H. Yanikomeroglu, “Enhancing resiliency of integrated space-air- ground-sea networks with renewable energies: A use case after the 2023 t\” urkiye earthquake,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17635 , 2024

    arXiv 2023

  5. [3]

    Ad- vancing non-intrusive load monitoring: Predicting appliance-level power consumption with indirect supervision,

    J. He, J. Feng, S. Guo, Z. Chen, Y. Liu, T. Xiang, and L. Zhu, “Ad- vancing non-intrusive load monitoring: Predicting appliance-level power consumption with indirect supervision,” IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, 2025

    work page 2025

  6. [4]

    Generative ai for unmanned vehicle swarms: Challenges, applications and opportunities,

    G. Liu, N. Van Huynh, H. Du, D. T. Hoang, D. Niyato, K. Zhu, J. Kang, Z. Xiong, A. Jamalipour, and D. I. Kim, “Generative ai for unmanned vehicle swarms: Challenges, applications and opportunities,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.18062, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [5]

    Digital twin-empowered task assignment in aerial mec network: A resource coalition co- operation approach with generative model,

    X. Tang, Q. Chen, R. Yu, and X. Li, “Digital twin-empowered task assignment in aerial mec network: A resource coalition co- operation approach with generative model,” IEEE Transactions on Network Science and Engineering, 2024

    work page 2024

  8. [6]

    An aggregate flow based scheduler in multi-task cooperated uavs network,

    L. Xiaohuan, X. Ziqi, Y. Jin, T. Xin, L. Chunhai, T. Fengzhu, and Y. Rong, “An aggregate flow based scheduler in multi-task cooperated uavs network,” Chinese Journal of Aeronautics , vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 2989–2998, 2020

    work page 2020

Show all 51 references
  1. [7]

    Cloud-edge-end collaborative intelligent service computation of- floading: A digital twin driven edge coalition approach for in- dustrial iot,

    X. Li, B. Chen, J. Fan, J. Kang, J. Ye, X. Wang, and D. Niyato, “Cloud-edge-end collaborative intelligent service computation of- floading: A digital twin driven edge coalition approach for in- dustrial iot,” IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 2024

    2024

  2. [8]

    Multi-agent q- net enhanced coevolutionary algorithm for resource allocation in emergency human-machine fusion uav-mec system,

    L. Sun, Z. Liu, Z. Ning, J. Wang, and X. Fu, “Multi-agent q- net enhanced coevolutionary algorithm for resource allocation in emergency human-machine fusion uav-mec system,” IEEE Trans- actions on Automation Science and Engineering , 2024

    2024

  3. [10]

    Generative ai for advanced uav networking,

    G. Sun, W. Xie, D. Niyato, H. Du, J. Kang, J. Wu, S. Sun, and P . Zhang, “Generative ai for advanced uav networking,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10556, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Two-timescale model caching and resource allocation for edge-enabled ai-generated content services,

    Z. Liu, H. Du, X. Hou, L. Huang, S. Hosseinalipour, D. Niyato, and K. B. Letaief, “Two-timescale model caching and resource allocation for edge-enabled ai-generated content services,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.01458, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Task delay and energy consumption minimization for low-altitude mec via evolutionary multi-objective deep reinforcement learning,

    G. Sun, W. Ma, J. Li, Z. Sun, J. Wang, D. Niyato, and S. Mao, “Task delay and energy consumption minimization for low-altitude mec via evolutionary multi-objective deep reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.06410, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Enhancing disaster resilience with uav-assisted edge computing: A reinforcement learning ap- proach to managing heterogeneous edge devices,

    T. Azfar, K. Huang, and R. Ke, “Enhancing disaster resilience with uav-assisted edge computing: A reinforcement learning ap- proach to managing heterogeneous edge devices,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.15305, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Ideas in the air: Unmanned aerial se- mantic communication for post-disaster scenarios,

    J. Xu, K. Ota, and M. Dong, “Ideas in the air: Unmanned aerial se- mantic communication for post-disaster scenarios,” IEEE Wireless Communications Letters, 2025. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MOBILE COMPUTING, VOL. X, NO. X, X 2025 16

    2025

  8. [15]

    Joint drl-based uav trajectory planning and teg-based task offloading,

    K. Zhao, L. Peng, and B. Tak, “Joint drl-based uav trajectory planning and teg-based task offloading,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 2025

    2025

  9. [16]

    Star-ris and uav combination in mec networks: Simultaneous task offload- ing and communications,

    H. Xiao, X. Hu, W. Wang, Z. Su, K.-K. Wong, and K. Yang, “Star-ris and uav combination in mec networks: Simultaneous task offload- ing and communications,” IEEE Transactions on Communications , 2025

    2025

  10. [17]

    User preference oriented service caching and task offloading for uav-assisted mec networks,

    R. Zhou, Y. Huang, Y. Wang, L. Jiao, H. Tan, R. Zhang, and L. Wu, “User preference oriented service caching and task offloading for uav-assisted mec networks,” IEEE Transactions on Services Comput- ing, 2025

    2025

  11. [18]

    Digital- twin-assisted task assignment in multi-uav systems: A deep re- inforcement learning approach,

    X. Tang, X. Li, R. Yu, Y. Wu, J. Ye, F. Tang, and Q. Chen, “Digital- twin-assisted task assignment in multi-uav systems: A deep re- inforcement learning approach,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 10, no. 17, pp. 15 362–15 375, 2023

    2023

  12. [19]

    Energy efficient computation offloading in aerial edge networks with multi-agent cooperation,

    W. Liu, B. Li, W. Xie, Y. Dai, and Z. Fei, “Energy efficient computation offloading in aerial edge networks with multi-agent cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 5725–5739, 2023

    2023

  13. [20]

    Generative ai-augmented graph reinforcement learning for adaptive uav swarm optimization,

    B. Hazarika, P . Singh, K. Singh, S. L. Cotton, H. Shin, O. A. Dobre, and T. Q. Duong, “Generative ai-augmented graph reinforcement learning for adaptive uav swarm optimization,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2025

    2025

  14. [22]

    All-sky autonomous computing in uav swarm,

    H. Sun, Y. Qu, C. Dong, H. Dai, Z. Li, L. Zhang, Q. Wu, and S. Guo, “All-sky autonomous computing in uav swarm,”IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2024

    2024

  15. [23]

    Jdaco: Joint data aggregation and computation offloading in uav-enabled internet of things for post- disaster scenarios,

    A. M. Raivi and S. Moh, “Jdaco: Joint data aggregation and computation offloading in uav-enabled internet of things for post- disaster scenarios,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2024

    2024

  16. [24]

    Joint task offloading and resource allocation in aerial- terrestrial uav networks with edge and fog computing for post- disaster rescue,

    G. Sun, L. He, Z. Sun, Q. Wu, S. Liang, J. Li, D. Niyato, and V . C. Leung, “Joint task offloading and resource allocation in aerial- terrestrial uav networks with edge and fog computing for post- disaster rescue,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Task offloading for post-disaster rescue in unmanned aerial ve- hicles networks,

    Y. Wang, W. Chen, T. H. Luan, Z. Su, Q. Xu, R. Li, and N. Chen, “Task offloading for post-disaster rescue in unmanned aerial ve- hicles networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking , vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1525–1539, 2022

    2022

  18. [26]

    Disaster resilient emergency communication with intelligent air-ground cooperation,

    X. Tang, F. Chen, F. Wang, and Z. Jia, “Disaster resilient emergency communication with intelligent air-ground cooperation,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Computational efficiency maximization for uav-assisted mec net- works with energy harvesting in disaster scenarios,

    R. Khalid, Z. Shah, M. Naeem, A. Ali, A. Al-Fuqaha, and W. Ejaz, “Computational efficiency maximization for uav-assisted mec net- works with energy harvesting in disaster scenarios,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Mission-aware uav deployment for post-disaster scenarios: A worst-case sac-based approach,

    J. Wang, Y. Sun, B. Wang, and T. Ushio, “Mission-aware uav deployment for post-disaster scenarios: A worst-case sac-based approach,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Maddpg-based joint service placement and task offloading in mec empowered air-ground integrated networks,

    J. Du, Z. Kong, A. Sun, J. Kang, D. Niyato, X. Chu, and F. R. Yu, “Maddpg-based joint service placement and task offloading in mec empowered air-ground integrated networks,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for task offloading in uav-assisted mobile edge computing,

    N. Zhao, Z. Ye, Y. Pei, Y.-C. Liang, and D. Niyato, “Multi-agent deep reinforcement learning for task offloading in uav-assisted mobile edge computing,” IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communi- cations, vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 6949–6960, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Joint cooperative computation of- floading and trajectory optimization in heterogeneous uav-swarm- enabled aerial edge computing networks,

    H. Yu, S. Leng, and F. Wu, “Joint cooperative computation of- floading and trajectory optimization in heterogeneous uav-swarm- enabled aerial edge computing networks,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 2024

    2024

  24. [32]

    Generative ai for space-air-ground integrated networks,

    R. Zhang, H. Du, D. Niyato, J. Kang, Z. Xiong, A. Jamalipour, P . Zhang, and D. I. Kim, “Generative ai for space-air-ground integrated networks,” IEEE Wireless Communications, 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Gan-powered heterogeneous multi-agent reinforcement learning for uav-assisted task offload- ing,

    Y. Li, L. Feng, Y. Yang, and W. Li, “Gan-powered heterogeneous multi-agent reinforcement learning for uav-assisted task offload- ing,” Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 153, p. 103341, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    Transformer- based reinforcement learning for scalable multi-uav area cover- age,

    D. Chen, Q. Qi, Q. Fu, J. Wang, J. Liao, and Z. Han, “Transformer- based reinforcement learning for scalable multi-uav area cover- age,” IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, 2024

    2024

  27. [35]

    Diffusion-based reinforcement learning for edge-enabled ai-generated content services,

    H. Du, Z. Li, D. Niyato, J. Kang, Z. Xiong, H. Huang, and S. Mao, “Diffusion-based reinforcement learning for edge-enabled ai-generated content services,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Com- puting, 2024

    2024

  28. [36]

    Robust lightweight uav inspection system for consumer elec- tronics applications in smart grids,

    X.-Y. Zhang, Y. Xuan, C. Mu, Z. Ding, H. Wang, and P . Guo, “Robust lightweight uav inspection system for consumer elec- tronics applications in smart grids,” IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 2025

    2025

  29. [37]

    Energy- aware dynamic resource allocation in uav assisted mobile edge computing over social internet of vehicles,

    L. Zhang, Z. Zhao, Q. Wu, H. Zhao, H. Xu, and X. Wu, “Energy- aware dynamic resource allocation in uav assisted mobile edge computing over social internet of vehicles,” IEEE Access , vol. 6, pp. 56 700–56 715, 2018

    2018

  30. [38]

    Computation rate maximization in uav-enabled wireless-powered mobile-edge com- puting systems,

    F. Zhou, Y. Wu, R. Q. Hu, and Y. Qian, “Computation rate maximization in uav-enabled wireless-powered mobile-edge com- puting systems,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 36, no. 9, pp. 1927–1941, 2018

    1927

  31. [39]

    Dense small cell networks: From noise-limited to dense interference-limited,

    B. Yang, G. Mao, M. Ding, X. Ge, and X. Tao, “Dense small cell networks: From noise-limited to dense interference-limited,” IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, vol. 67, no. 5, pp. 4262–4277, 2018

    2018

  32. [40]

    Power distribution of device-to- device communications under nakagami fading channel,

    A. Boumaalif and O. Zytoune, “Power distribution of device-to- device communications under nakagami fading channel,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing , vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 2158–2167, 2020

    2020

  33. [41]

    Non-cooperative resource competi- tion game by virtual referee in multi-cell ofdma networks,

    Z. Han, Z. Ji, and K. R. Liu, “Non-cooperative resource competi- tion game by virtual referee in multi-cell ofdma networks,” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 1079– 1090, 2007

    2007

  34. [42]

    Processor design for portable systems,

    T. D. Burd and R. W. Brodersen, “Processor design for portable systems,” Journal of VLSI signal processing systems for signal, image and video technology, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 203–221, 1996

    1996

  35. [43]

    Uav-assisted task offload- ing in vehicular edge computing networks,

    X. Dai, Z. Xiao, H. Jiang, and J. C. Lui, “Uav-assisted task offload- ing in vehicular edge computing networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 2520–2534, 2023

    2023

  36. [44]

    Task offloading for post-disaster rescue in unmanned aerial ve- hicles networks,

    Y. Wang, W. Chen, T. H. Luan, Z. Su, Q. Xu, R. Li, and N. Chen, “Task offloading for post-disaster rescue in unmanned aerial ve- hicles networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions On Networking , vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 1525–1539, 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    I. E. Grossmann and Z. Kravanja, Mixed-integer nonlinear program- ming: A survey of algorithms and applications . Springer, 1997

    1997

  38. [46]

    Energy-efficient resource allocation in wireless networks,

    F. Meshkati, H. V . Poor, and S. C. Schwartz, “Energy-efficient resource allocation in wireless networks,” IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 58–68, 2007

    2007

  39. [47]

    Neely, Stochastic network optimization with application to commu- nication and queueing systems

    M. Neely, Stochastic network optimization with application to commu- nication and queueing systems . Morgan & Claypool Publishers, 2010

    2010

  40. [48]

    Intro- duction to algorithms (3-rd edition),

    T. H. Cormen, C. E. Leiserson, R. L. Rivest, and C. Stein, “Intro- duction to algorithms (3-rd edition),” MIT Press and McGraw-Hill , 2009

    2009

  41. [49]

    Gainnet: Coordinates the odd couple of generative ai and 6g networks,

    N. Chen, J. Yang, Z. Cheng, X. Fan, Z. Liu, B. Huang, Y. Zhao, L. Huang, X. Du, and M. Guizani, “Gainnet: Coordinates the odd couple of generative ai and 6g networks,” IEEE Network, 2024

    2024

  42. [50]

    Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,

    J. Ho, A. Jain, and P . Abbeel, “Denoising diffusion probabilistic models,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 33, pp. 6840–6851, 2020

    2020

  43. [51]

    Joint optimization of uav-carried irs for urban low altitude mmwave communications with deep reinforcement learning,

    W. Xie, G. Sun, B. Liu, J. Li, J. Wang, H. Du, D. Niyato, and D. I. Kim, “Joint optimization of uav-carried irs for urban low altitude mmwave communications with deep reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.02787, 2025

    2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.