MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2528584088 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2016.2615261

Secure Transmission in Cognitive Satellite Terrestrial Networks

2016· article· en· W2528584088 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 Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceChannel state informationTelecommunications linkTransmission (telecommunications)BeamformingBase stationSatelliteComputer networkInterference (communication)Optimization problemChannel (broadcasting)TelecommunicationsWirelessAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the physical layer security of a satellite network, whose downlink spectral resource is shared with a terrestrial cellular network. We propose to employ a multi-antenna base station (BS) as a source of green interference to enhance secure transmission in the satellite network. By taking the mutual interference between these two networks into account, we first formulate a constrained optimization problem to maximize the instantaneous rate of the terrestrial user while satisfying the interference probability constraint of the satellite user. Then, with the assumption that imperfect channel state information (CSI) and statistical CSI of the link between the BS and satellite user are available at the BS, we present two beamforming (BF) schemes, namely, hybrid zero-forcing and partial zero-forcing to solve the optimization problem and obtain the BF weight vectors in a closed form. Moreover, we analyze the secrecy performance of primary satellite network by considering two practical scenarios, namely: Scenario I, the eavesdroppers CSI is unknown at the satellite and Scenario II, the eavesdroppers CSI is known at the satellite. Specifically, we derive the analytical expressions for the secrecy outage probability for Scenario I and the average secrecy rate for Scenario II. Finally, numerical results are provided to confirm the superiority of the proposed BF schemes and the validity of the performance analysis, as well as demonstrate the impacts of various parameters on the secrecy performance of the satellite network.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.251 · 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