MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385214689 · doi:10.1109/tvt.2023.3298514

Dual Wireless Anti-Interception for Ground Combat Vehicles

2023· article· en· W4385214689 on OpenAlexaff
Van Hau Le, Ti Ti Nguyen, Kim Khoa Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Ad Hoc Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterceptionTactical communicationsReinforcement learningComputer scienceWirelessThroughputContext (archaeology)Selection (genetic algorithm)Mathematical optimizationAdversaryWireless networkDual (grammatical number)Convex optimizationEngineeringComputer networkRegular polygonArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Protecting a large number of wireless communication links against the interception of enemy in Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) systems is challenging. Due to the high mobility of ground combat vehicles (GCVs), the Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) capacity can easily be violated. Prior work focuses mainly on a single interception technique, which exposes vulnerabilities when multiple interception techniques are deployed simultaneously. We propose a strategy against both energy-based and correlation-based interception techniques by jointly optimizing power allocation (PA) and spreading factor assignment (SA) of the WIN-T. This non-convex problem is then solved by advanced optimization techniques such as decomposition and difference of convex functions (DC). We also propose a communication mode selection strategy to improve the throughput performance in the context of LPI conservation. To obtain the optimized solution in near real-time, we design a Multi-Agent Deep Reinforcement Learning (MADRL) algorithm. Our numerical results show the performance of the proposed MADRL algorithm is close to the optimal solution, making it applicable for practical systems.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Vehicular TechnologySame topicMobile Ad Hoc NetworksFrench-language works237,207