MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Artificial-Noise Alignment for Secure Multicast using Multiple Antennas

2013· article· en· W2066459959 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Letters · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial noiseComputer scienceSecure multicastTransmitterNoise (video)Channel (broadcasting)GeneralizationDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Theoretical computer scienceMulticastUpper and lower boundsTopology (electrical circuits)AlgorithmComputer networkArtificial intelligenceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We propose an artificial-noise alignment scheme for multicasting a common-confidential message to a group of legitimate receivers. Our scheme transmits a superposition of information and noise symbols. At each legitimate receiver, the noise symbols are aligned in such a way that the information symbols can be decoded with high probability. In contrast, the noise symbols completely mask the information symbols at the eavesdroppers. Our proposed scheme does not use the knowledge of the eavesdropper's channel gains at the transmitter for alignment, yet it achieves the best-known lower bound on the secure degrees of freedom. The knowledge of the eavesdropper's channel gains is still necessary when selecting the rate of the wiretap code. Our scheme is also a natural generalization of the approach of transmitting artificial noise in the null-space of the legitimate receiver's channel, previously proposed in the literature.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.917
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.229 · 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