This section formulates the UAV‑CRN rate maximization problem and proposes a BCD‑SCA algorithm, decomposing it into convex subproblems with proven convergence.This section formulates the UAV‑CRN rate maximization problem and proposes a BCD‑SCA algorithm, decomposing it into convex subproblems with proven convergence.

BCD‑SCA Based Optimization for UAV‑CRN: Joint Trajectory, Power, and Scheduling Design

2025/08/25 03:36
4 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

Abstract and I. Introduction

II. System Model

III. Problem Formulation

IV. Proposed Algorithm for Problem P0

V. Numerical Results

VI. Conclusion

APPENDIX A: PROOF OF LEMMA 1 and References

II. SYSTEM MODEL

\ The channel coefficient between B and X in the nth time slot is expressed a

\

\

\ The horizontal energy consumption of B is expressed as [14]

\

\ The energy consumption of B in the vertical direction is as expressed as [24], [39]

\

\ Fig. 2: The comparison among different schemes.

\ The average rate of the considered system is expressed as

\

\

III. PROBLEM FORMULATION

In this work, the average rate of the system is optimized, which is related to user scheduling, the transmission power and 3D trajectory, the horizontal and vertical velocities of B. Then the following optimization problem is formulated

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ \

\

IV. PROPOSED ALGORITHM FOR PROBLEM P0

To solve P0, we utilize the BCD technology to decompose the original problem into multiple subproblems. Specifically, for the given other variables, A, P, H, and Q are optimized in each subproblem respectively. In addition, the SCA technology is utilized to transform the non-convex constraints into convex constraints.

\ A. Subproblem 1: Optimizing User Scheduling Variable

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ B. Subproblem 2: Optimizing Transmit Power of B

\ \

\ \ C. Subproblem 3: Optimizing Horizontal Trajectory and Velocity of B

\ In this subsection, the horizontal trajectory and velocity of B is optimized for provided {A,P,H}. The original optimization problem is rewritten as

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ \

\ \ \

\ \ \

\ \ To address the non-convexity in (19a), Lemma 1 is introduced.

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ D. Subproblem 4: Optimizing Horizontal Trajectory and Velocity of B

\ In this subsection, for given {A,P,Q}, the vertical trajectory H of B is optimized. The optimization problem is expressed as

\ \

\ \ With the same method as (13b), (23b) is reformulated as (19a)-(19d) and (1a) and (1b) are reformulated as (16c), (16e), and (19c). With the same method in Subproblem 3, (9) in this subsection is reformulated as (16a)-(16f) wherein (16b) and (16d) are reformulated as (18a) and (18b), respectively.

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ P4.2 is a convex optimization problem that can be solved using existing optimization tools such as CVX.

\ E. Convergence Analysis of Algorithm 1

\ \

\ \ The obtained suboptimal solution of the transformed subproblem is also the suboptimal solution of the original nonconvex subproblem, and each subproblem is solved using SCA convex transformation iteration. Finally, all suboptimal solutions of the subproblems that satisfy the threshold ε constitute the suboptimal solution of the original problem. Therefore, our algorithm is to alternately solve the subproblem P1.1, P2.1, P3.2 and P4.2 to obtain the suboptimal solution of the original problem until a solution that satisfies the threshold ε is obtained.

\ It is worth noting that in the classic BCD, to ensure the convergence of the algorithm, it is necessary to accurately solve and update the subproblems of each variable block with optimality in each iteration. But when we solve P3.1 and P4.1 , we can only optimally solve their approximation problem P3.2 and P4.2. Therefore, we cannot directly apply the convergence analysis of the classical BCD, and further proof of the convergence of Algorithm 1 is needed, as shown below.

\ \

\ \ \

\ \ (30) This is similar to the representation in (29), and from (27) to (30), we obtain

\ 1 . (31) The above analysis indicates that the target value of P0 does not decrease after each iteration of Algorithm 1. Due to the objective value of P0 is a finite upper bound, therefore the proposed Algorithm 1 ensures convergence. The simulation results in the next section indicate that the proposed BCDbased method converges rapidly for the setting we are considering. In addition, since only convex optimization problems need to be solved in each iteration of Algorithm 1, which have polynomial complexity, Algorithm 1 can actually converge

\ \ Fig. 3: The average rate and user scheduling.

\ \ \ Fig. 4: 3D trajectories of B under different schemes and scenarios.

\ \ quickly for wireless networks with a moderate number of users.

\ \

\

:::info Authors:

(1) Hongjiang Lei, School of Communications and Information Engineering, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing 400065, China (leihj@cqupt.edu.cn);

(2) Xiaqiu Wu, School of Communications and Information Engineering, Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing 400065, China (cquptwxq@163.com);

(3) Ki-Hong Park, CEMSE Division, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia (kihong.park@kaust.edu.sa);

(4) Gaofeng Pan, School of Cyberspace Science and Technology, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China (gaofeng.pan.cn@ieee.org).

:::


:::info This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.

:::

\

Market Opportunity
Scallop Logo
Scallop Price(SCA)
$0.0255
$0.0255$0.0255
-0.77%
USD
Scallop (SCA) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Top Low-Cost Cryptocurrencies Analysts Are Watching for 2027

Top Low-Cost Cryptocurrencies Analysts Are Watching for 2027

Investors are now hunting for projects that combine affordability with actual utility. While famous names still hold the spotlight, a new crypto era of decentralized
Share
Techbullion2026/03/14 10:49
Google Cloud taps EigenLayer to bring trust to agentic payments

Google Cloud taps EigenLayer to bring trust to agentic payments

The post Google Cloud taps EigenLayer to bring trust to agentic payments appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Two days after unveiling AP2 — a universal payment layer for AI agents that supports everything from credit cards to stablecoins — Google and EigenLayer have released details of their partnership to bring verifiability and restaking security to the stack, using Ethereum. In addition to enabling verifiable compute and slashing-backed payment coordination, EigenCloud will support insured and sovereign AI agents, which introduce consequences for failure or deviation from specified behavior. Sovereign agents are positioned as autonomous actors that can own property, make decisions, and execute actions independently — think smart contracts with embedded intelligence. From demos to dollars AP2 extends Google’s agent-to-agent (A2A) protocol using the HTTP 402 status code — long reserved for “payment required” — to standardize payment requests between agents across different networks. It already supports stablecoins like USDC, and Coinbase has demoed an agent checkout using its Wallet-as-a-Service. Paired with a system like Lit Protocol’s Vincent — which enforces per-action policies and key custody at signing — Google’s AP2 with EigenCloud’s verifiability and cross-chain settlement could form an end-to-end trust loop. Payments between agents aren’t as simple as they are often made to sound by “Crypto x AI” LARPs. When an AI agent requests a payment in USDC on Base and the payer’s funds are locked in ETH on Arbitrum, the transaction stalls — unless something abstracts the bridging, swapping and delivery. That’s where EigenCloud comes in. Sreeram Kannan, founder of EigenLayer, said the integration will create agents that not only run on-chain verifiable compute, but are also economically incentivized to behave within programmable bounds. Through restaked operators, EigenCloud powers a verifiable payment service that handles asset routing and chain abstraction, with dishonest behavior subject to slashing. It also introduces cryptographic accountability to the agents themselves, enabling proofs that an agent actually executed the task it…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/19 03:52
SEC Approves First US Multi-Crypto ETP — Insights from Grayscale CEO

SEC Approves First US Multi-Crypto ETP — Insights from Grayscale CEO

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has greenlit the first multi-asset cryptocurrency exchange-traded product (ETP) in the United States, authorizing Grayscale’s Digital Large Cap Fund (GLDC) for public listing. This groundbreaking development offers investors exposure to five leading cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), XRP (XRP), Solana (SOL), and Cardano (ADA). The approval, disclosed in [...]
Share
Crypto Breaking News2025/09/18 17:26