MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MIMO Broadcast Channel with an Unknown Eavesdropper: Secrecy Degrees of Freedom

2014· article· en· W2158946869 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 Transactions on Communications · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCodebookDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)SecrecyMIMOChannel (broadcasting)Artificial noiseComputer scienceLinear subspaceSubspace topologyInformation-theoretic securityComputer networkTransmitterMathematicsComputer securityAlgorithmArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study a multi-antenna broadcast channel with two legitimate receivers and an external eavesdropper. We assume that the channel matrix of the eavesdropper is unknown to the legitimate terminals but satisfies a maximum rank constraint. As our main result we characterize the associated secrecy degrees of freedom for the broadcast channel with common and private messages. We show that a direct extension of the single-user wiretap codebook does not achieve the secrecy degrees of freedom. Our proposed optimal scheme involves decomposing the signal space into a common subspace, which can be observed by both receivers, and private subspaces which can be observed by only one of the receivers, and carefully transmitting a subset of messages in each subspace. We also consider the case when each user's private message must additionally remain confidential from the other legitimate receiver and characterize the s.d.o.f. region in this case.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.925
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 science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.225 · 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