Secure OFDM transmission based on multiple relay selection and cooperation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In cooperative communications, spatial channel diversity introduced by scattered locations of cooperating nodes can be exploited to enhance transmission security. In this paper, we propose a secure cooperative orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) transmission scheme with the help of multiple relay nodes. For each relay, the wireless channels related to the destination and the eavesdropper are independent of each other, leading to different achievable rates over each subcarrier. In the proposed scheme, relay nodes with high rate differences between the intended receiver and the eavesdropper are selected for transmission. Different cooperation strategies ranging from single-relay selection to per-subcarrier-based multiple-relay selection are studied and compared. As a result of relay selection, each cooperative relay node only forwards a subset of subcarriers that exhibits high capacity differences, thereby enhancing transmission security of the whole system. Secrecy outage probabilities for the proposed scheme with different relay selection strategies are formulated. Numerical simulation results demonstrate the validity of the scheme for security enhancement.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".