Robust and secure beamformer design for MIMO relaying with imperfect eavesdropper CSI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a computationally efficient beamforming approach to combat wiretapping in a relay-based multiple-input multiple output (MIMO) communication system which is part of a cognitive radio (CR) network. The system operates in two stages, that is, multiple-access (MA) followed by broadcasting (BC) using physical layer network coding (PNC). The beamforming design is based on minimizing the mean square error (MSE) at the receiving node(s) while enforcing signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) constraints at the eavesdroppers. The constraints take into account uncertainty bounds on eavesdropper channel estimation errors. In each stage of communication, an optimization problem is devised and solved using an iterative procedure, considering two different types of eavesdropper functionality, i.e., selection combining and “blind” beamforming. Numerical results show the convergence of the MSE at the nodes and the SINR distributions at the eavesdroppers for both cases. Comparisons to previously suggested solutions for blind beamforming are also included showing improvements in MSE values in the MA stage and computational efficiency in both stages.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".