Physical layer secrecy for wireless communication systems using adaptive HARQ with error contamination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes a physical layer coding scheme to provide reliability and security in wireless communication systems. An Adaptive Granular Hybrid Automatic Repeat re- Quest (AG-HARQ) scheme based on Low-Density-Parity-Check (LDPC) codes is proposed. In the AG-HARQ protocol, the whole codewords are first transmitted (by Alice) to the intended receiver (Bob) and potentially intercepted by an unauthorized receiver or eavesdropper (Eve). Whenever the legitimate receiver (Bob) fails to decode the correct message, the received codewords are splitted into sub-packets and Bob computes a decoding confidence index for each of these sub-packets. Bob can then request a retransmission of those sub-packets having the lowest confidence indexes. These sub-packets are requested by Bob until correct decoding or until a maximum number of retransmissions is reached. An error contamination (EC) mechanism is also proposed which spreads the errors in the current frame with a scrambler and to the other frames by use of block interleavers. The proposed scheme ensures reliable and secure communication even in the case of negative Security Gap (SG) where the eavesdropper's channel benefits from better channel conditions than the legitimate channel.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".