Robust MISO Beamforming With Cooperative Jamming for Secure Transmission From Perspectives of QoS and Secrecy Rate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robust quality-of-service (QoS)-based and secrecy rate-based secure transmission designs are investigated for a multiple-input single-output system with multiple eavesdroppers and a cooperative jammer. Two scenarios are considered: (a) eavesdroppers' channel state information (ECSI) is available and (b) ECSI is unavailable. In scenario (a), a QoS-based design is considered to minimize the worst case signal-to-interference-and-noise ratio at the eavesdroppers and to guarantee the QoS of the legitimate receiver. A secrecy rate-based design is also studied where the worst case secrecy rate is maximized. In scenario (b), a QoS-based design is considered to maximize the power of jamming signals under the QoS constraint of the legitimate receiver, and the secrecy rate-based design is not applicable. In all these designs, we jointly optimize the transmit beamforming vector and the covariance matrix of jamming signals under individual power constraints. As the optimization problems are non-convex, we propose an algorithm for each problem through semidefinite relaxation. Our analysis and simulation results show that, even though the linear precoding scheme in our designs is transmit beamforming rather than the general rank transmit covariance, this does not cause any loss of optimality.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".