Secrecy-Capacity Bounds for Visible Light Communications With Signal-Dependent Noise
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In physical-layer security, secrecy capacity is an important performance metric. This work aims to determine the secrecy capacity for an indoor visible light communication system consisting of a transmitter, a legitimate receiver and an eavesdropping receiver. In such a system, both signal-independent noise and signal-dependent noise are considered. Under nonnegativity and average optical intensity constraints, lower and upper bounds on secrecy capacity are derived by the variational method, the dual expression of the secrecy capacity, and the concept of “the optimal input distribution that escapes to infinity”. By an asymptotic analysis at large optical intensity, there is a small gap between the asymptotic upper and lower bounds. Then, by adding a peak optical intensity constraint, we further analyze the exact and asymptotic secrecy-capacity bounds. For practical considerations, the effects of imperfect channel state information, multi-photodiode eavesdropper, and artificial noise on secrecy performance are also discussed. Finally, the derived secrecy-capacity bounds are verified by numerical results.
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 | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".