MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953177019 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2019.0198

Physical layer secrecy performance of multiple antennas transmission with partial legitimate user CSI

2019· article· en· W2953177019 on OpenAlexaff
Tingnan Bao, Hong‐Chuan Yang, Mazen O. Hasna

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyPhysical layerComputer scienceTransmission (telecommunications)Computer networkSecure transmissionLayer (electronics)TelecommunicationsComputer securityWirelessMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional beamforming transmission techniques can enhance physical layer secrecy performance while requiring the full channel state information (CSI) of legitimate users and even that of eavesdroppers at the transmitter. However, providing full CSI of legitimate users at the transmitter can be challenging in practice. Thus, it is of considerable interest to enhance secrecy performance with partial CSI of legitimate users at the transmitter. Random unitary beamforming (RUB) is a low‐complexity multiple antennas transmission scheme requiring limited CSI. In this study, the authors investigate the secrecy performance of RUB transmission over multiple‐input single‐output single‐eavesdropper and multiuser multiple‐input multiple‐output single‐eavesdropper channels. They also propose a novel RUB‐based artificial noise (AN) method for multiple antennas communication system. They derive the closed‐form expressions of the exact and the asymptotic ergodic secrecy rate and the secrecy outage probability for these transmission scenarios. Numerical results are presented to illustrate the trade‐off between performance and complexity of the resulting physical layer security design. They show that the deployment of RUB and RUB‐based AN offers an attractive solution for enhancing the security of wireless transmission systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.757
Threshold uncertainty score0.557

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET CommunicationsSame topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207