X
Xiangjie Kong
Researcher at Zhejiang University of Technology
Publications - 161
Citations - 6003
Xiangjie Kong is an academic researcher from Zhejiang University of Technology. The author has contributed to research in topics: Computer science & The Internet. The author has an hindex of 37, co-authored 152 publications receiving 3929 citations. Previous affiliations of Xiangjie Kong include Dalian University of Technology & Zhejiang University.
Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
Design and Information Architectures for an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Cooperative Formation Tracking Controller
TL;DR: The designed controller is robust for tracking moving targets and achieves good flight-stability when tracking such targets and the design of a distributed control law is achieved based on the type of information construction between UAVs.
Journal ArticleDOI
Cross-domain item recommendation based on user similarity
TL;DR: A cross-domain item recommendation model based on user similarity called CRUS is proposed, which firstly introduces the trust relation among friends into cross- domain recommendation and outperforms the baseline methods on MAE and RMSE.
Journal ArticleDOI
An adaptive MAC protocol for real-time and reliable communications in medical cyber-physical systems
TL;DR: An adaptive MAC protocol based on IEEE 802.15.4, namely Ada-MAC, which can not only enable dynamic Guaranteed Time Slots allocation but also provide differentiated services for different nodes according to their data types is proposed.
Journal ArticleDOI
Understanding the advisor–advisee relationship via scholarly data analysis
TL;DR: It is found that with the increase of advisors’ academic age, advisees’ performance experiences an initial growth, follows a sustaining stage, and finally ends up with a declining trend.
Journal ArticleDOI
Editorial behaviors in peer review
TL;DR: An agent-based model is proposed in which the process of peer review is guided mainly by the social interactions among three kinds of agents representing authors, editors and reviewers respectively, and it is found that peer review outcomes are significantly sensitive to different editorial behaviors.