Secure Massive MIMO Relaying Systems in a Poisson Field of Eavesdroppers
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A cooperative relay network operating in the presence of eavesdroppers, whose locations are distributed according to a homogeneous Poisson point process, is considered. The relay is equipped with a very large antenna array and can exploit maximal ratio combing in the uplink and maximal ratio transmission in the downlink. A realistic model in which the channel state information of every eavesdropper is not known is considered, as eavesdroppers tend to hide themselves in practice. The destination is thus in a much weaker position than all the eavesdroppers because it only receives the retransmitted signal from the relay. Under this setting, the security performance is investigated for two relaying protocols: amplify-and-forward and decode-and-forward. The secrecy outage probability, the connection outage probability, and the tradeoff between them, which is controlled by the source power allocation, are examined. Finally, suitable solutions for the source power (such that once the transmission occurs with high reliability, the secure risk is below a given threshold) are proposed for a tradeoff between security and reliability.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it