MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4234043166 · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.14216567

Meta Distribution and Secrecy of Partial Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access (NOMA) in Poisson Networks

2021· preprint· en· W4234043166 on OpenAlexaff
Konpal Shaukat Ali, Arafat Al‐Dweik

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Technologies
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNomaComputer scienceEavesdroppingSecrecyContext (archaeology)Computer networkDecoding methodsTheoretical computer scienceTelecommunications linkAlgorithmComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div>This work studies the meta distribution in a partial-NOMA network to obtain fine-grained information about the network performance. As the meta distribution is approximated using the beta distribution via moment matching of the first two moments, reduced integral expressions are derived for the first two moments of the meta distribution. Accurate approximate moments are also proposed to further simplify the calculation. Security is an issue in partial-NOMA because the strong user may decode the weak user’s message in the process of decoding its own message using flexible successive interference cancellation (FSIC). Therefore, a measure of secrecy is defined in this context and the secrecy probability is derived for the case of: 1) a malicious strong user that prioritizes eavesdropping, 2) an innocent strong user that decodes the weak user’s message only when it is required to do so. The obtained results highlight the superiority of partial-NOMA over traditional NOMA in terms of secrecy. They also show that receive filtering and FSIC have a significant positive impact on the secrecy of partial- OMA. Furthermore, partial-NOMA with a small overlap of the resource-block can secure the network from the additional deterioration a malicious eavesdropper may cause.</div>

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.617
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.278
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207