MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3135019935 · doi:10.3390/app11052362

A Correlation-Based Sensing Scheme for Outlier Detection in Cognitive Radio Networks

2021· article· en· W3135019935 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Sajjad Khan, Mohammad Faisal, Su Min Kim, Saeed Ahmed, Marc St‐Hilaire, Junsu Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum Sensing
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersInstitute for Information and Communications Technology PromotionMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaIran Telecommunication Research CenterNational Research Foundation
KeywordsOutlierCognitive radioComputer scienceScheme (mathematics)Fusion centerAnomaly detectionSimilarity (geometry)Data miningCorrelationSpectrum (functional analysis)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cooperative spectrum sensing (CSS) is a vital part of cognitive radio networks, which ensures the existence of the primary user (PU) in the network. However, the presence of malicious users (MUs) highly degrades the performance of the system. In the proposed scheme, each secondary user (SU) reports to the fusion center (FC) with a hard decision of the sensing energy to indicate the existence of the PU. The main contribution of this work deals with MU attacks, specifically spectrum sensing data falsification (SSDF) attacks. In this paper, we propose a correlation-based approach to differentiate between the SUs and the outliers by determining the sensing of each SU, and the average value of sensing information with other SUs, to predict the SSDF attack in the system. The FC determines the abnormality of a SU by determining the similarity for each SU with the remaining SUs by following the proposed scheme and declares the SU as an outlier using the box-whisker plot. The effectiveness of the proposed scheme was demonstrated through simulations.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicCognitive Radio Networks and Spectrum SensingFrench-language works237,207