MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321506454 · doi:10.1049/pbse018e_ch13

Security in physical layer of cognitive radio networks

2022· book-chapter· en· W4321506454 on OpenAlexaff
Deemah H. Tashman, Walaa Hamouda

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical layerCognitive radioComputer scienceComputer securityComputer networkWirelessPhysical securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fifth-generation (5G) networks and beyond are anticipated to support a vast number of connections and services. Due to the enormous amount of confidential data shared between devices in these networks, the risk of security vulnerabilities escalates proportionally. Cognitive radio networks (CRNs) are no exception since they are vulnerable to a variety of physical-layer threats; hence, a physical-layer approach is necessary to safeguard these networks. Consequently, physical-layer security (PLS) has recently been applied for examining and strengthening the security of wireless networks, including CRNs. In light of this, this chapter examines a brief overview of CRNs, as well as the main physical layer attacks and their respective primary countermeasures. In addition, the employment of energy harvesting (EH) techniques to improve CRNs security is discussed. The security threats on cognitive unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and their primary defense mechanisms are presented. In addition, the consideration of cascaded fading channels and their effect on the security of CRNs are explored. Finally, this chapter includes conclusions and potential future directions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.007

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207