Anonymous Mutual and Batch Authentication with Location Privacy of UAV in FANET
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As there has been an advancement in avionic systems in recent years, the enactment of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) has upgraded. As compared to a single UAV system, multiple UAV systems can perform operations more inexpensively and efficiently. As a result, new technologies between user/control station and UAVs have been developed. FANET (Flying Ad-Hoc Network) is a subset of the MANET (Mobile Ad-Hoc Network) that includes UAVs. UAVs, simply called drones, are used for collecting sensitive data in real time. The security and privacy of these data are of priority importance. Therefore, to overcome the privacy and security threats problem and to make communication between the UAV and the user effective, a competent anonymous mutual authentication scheme is proposed in this work. There are several methodologies addressed in this work such as anonymous batch authentication in FANET which helps to authenticate a large group of drones at the same time, thus reducing the computational overhead. In addition, the integrity preservation technique helps to avoid message alteration during transmission. Moreover, the security investigation section discusses the resistance of the proposed work against different types of possible attacks. Finally, the proposed work is related to the prevailing schemes in terms of communication and computational cost and proves to be more efficient.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".