Table 2.
Comparison of related work and proposed work.
| Study | Key focus | Access method |
Optimization type |
Interference management |
Spectral efficiency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Al-Hourani et al. (2014)24 |
Optimal UAD deployment to enhance coverage |
Orthogonal Access |
Fixed UAD Placement and Trajectory Optimization |
Limited, focused on deployment |
Moderate |
| Gupta et al. (2015)26 |
Survey of UAV communication issues |
Orthogonal Access |
Survey on power adjustments |
Dynamic power allocation for interference |
Moderate |
| Lu et al. (2023)25 |
Interference management in UAD |
Orthogonal Access |
Power Control for Interference Management |
Extensive interference mitigation |
Moderate |
| Tang & Chen (2024)27 |
NOMA for UAV-assisted networks |
NOMA |
Power Allocation |
Improved inter-UAD interference management |
High |
| Jia et al. (2021)28 |
Energy-efficient power allocation in UAV networks |
NOMA |
Power and Bandwidth Allocation |
Energy-efficient interference management |
High |
| Zhai et al. (2022)29 | UAD placement with NOMA | NOMA | Placement and Resource Management |
Integrated interference and energy considerations |
High |
| Sehito et al. (2024)30 |
User association and power optimization |
NOMA |
Joint Optimization (User Association, Power) |
Moderate inter- and intra-UAD interference handling |
High |
| Xi et al. (2021)31 |
Energy-efficient resource allocation for NOMA |
NOMA |
Joint Resource Allocation |
Focus on energy efficiency, limited interference |
High |
|
Proposed Work |
Joint UAD-user association and power optimization |
NOMA |
Sequential Joint Optimization |
Comprehensive inter- and intra-UAD interference management |
Very high |