MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2965986362 · doi:10.1109/lwc.2019.2932673

Secrecy Outage Performance of Opportunistic Relay Selection With Limited CSI Feedback

2019· article· en· W2965986362 on OpenAlexaff
Zhi Yan, Bo Ouyang, Xing Zhang, Hongli Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCooperative Communication and Network Coding
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHubei Key Laboratory of Intelligent Wireless CommunicationsChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSecrecyRelayComputer scienceSelection (genetic algorithm)Expression (computer science)Computer networkSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Outage probabilityTopology (electrical circuits)FadingTelecommunicationsMathematicsComputer securityPower (physics)Channel (broadcasting)Artificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Opportunistic relay selection is an important approach to enhance physical layer secrecy of relaying networks, but that severely depends on the obtained CSIs. In this letter, we study the impact of limited CSI feedback on the secrecy performance of cooperative decode-and-forward (DF) relay networks with opportunistic relay selection. We first derive the exact closed-form expression for the secrecy outage probability (SOP), and the asymptotic expression for SOP in the high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) region. Then, based on the derived expressions, we evaluate the impact of limited CSI feeback on secrecy outage probability and secrecy diversity order. Numerical results show that the secrecy diversity order is 2, regardless of the number of feedback bits. However, increasing the number of feedback bits can improve the secrecy outage performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Wireless Communications LettersSame topicCooperative Communication and Network CodingFrench-language works237,207