MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061534192 · doi:10.1109/glocom.2014.7036875

Relay authentication by exploiting I/Q imbalance in amplify-and-forward system

2014· article· en· W2061534192 on OpenAlexaff
Peng Hao, Xianbin Wang, Aydin Behnad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRelayComputer scienceAuthentication (law)WirelessComputer networkTransmission (telecommunications)Fingerprint (computing)Computer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although cooperative relaying has been widely utilized in wireless communications, it simultaneously introduces a new source of security vulnerabilities to the wireless networks such as denial of service attacks. In order to minimize the potential security risks from relays, reliable relay authentication schemes become necessitated. In this paper, a novel relay authentication scheme is proposed to secure amplify-and-forward relay systems through utilizing the device-dependent hardware imperfection in-phase/quadrature (I/Q) imbalance. In this scheme, the I/Q imbalance associated with the receiving and transmission of the relaying process is considered as a unique device fingerprint. This fingerprint is then utilized to develop a two-parameter hypothesis testing based authentication. To enhance the performance in differentiating delicate difference between I/Q imbalances, the generalized likelihood ratio test for classical linear model is used in our hypothesis decision algorithm. The performance of the proposed authentication scheme is assessed and validated by numerical simulations. The results show significantly enhanced authentication accuracy of our new method in comparison with other I/Q imbalance based hypothesis decision algorithms.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207