Joint Transceiver Design for Secure Downlink Communications Over an Amplify-and-Forward MIMO Relay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses joint transceiver design for secure downlink communications over a multiple-input multiple-output relay system in the presence of multiple legitimate users and malicious eavesdroppers. Specifically, we jointly optimize the base station (BS) beamforming matrix, the relay station (RS) amplify-and-forward transformation matrix, and the covariance matrix of artificial noise, so as to maximize the system worst-case secrecy rate in the presence of the colluding eavesdroppers under power constraints at the BS and the RS, as well as quality of service constraints for the legitimate users. This problem is very challenging due to the highly coupled design variables in the objective function and constraints. By adopting a series of transformation, we first derive an equivalent problem that is more tractable than the original one. Then, we propose and fully develop a novel algorithm based on the penalty concave-convex procedure (penalty-CCCP) to solve the equivalent problem, where the difficult coupled constraint is penalized into the objective and the resulting nonconvex problem is solved at each iteration by resorting to the CCCP method. It is shown that the proposed joint transceiver design algorithm converges to a stationary solution of the original problem. Finally, our simulation results reveal that the proposed algorithm achieves better performance than other recently proposed transceiver designs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".