MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393305479 · doi:10.13052/2794-7254.006

On the Impact of CDL and TDL Augmentation for RF Fingerprinting Under Impaired Channels

2024· article· en· W4393305479 on OpenAlexaff
Ömer Melih Gül, Michel Kulhandjian, Burak Kantarcı, Claude D’Amours, Azzedine Touazi, Cliff Ellement

Bibliographic record

VenueWireless World Research and Trends Magazine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Line Communications and Noise
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyber-physical systems have recently been used in several areas (such as connected and autonomous vehicles) due to their high maneuverability. On the other hand, they are susceptible to cyber-attacks. Radio frequency (RF) fingerprinting emerges as a promising approach. This work aims to analyze the impact of decoupling tapped delay line and clustered delay line (TDL+CDL) augmentation-driven deep learning (DL) on transmitter-specific fingerprints to discriminate malicious users from legitimate ones. This work also considers 5G-only-CDL, WiFi-only-TDL augmentation approaches. RF fingerprinting models are sensitive to changing channels and environmental conditions. For this reason, they should be considered during the deployment of a DL model. Data acquisition can be another option. Nonetheless, gathering samples under various conditions for a train set formation may be quite hard. Consequently, data acquisition may not be feasible. This work uses a dataset that includes 5G, 4G, and WiFi samples, and it empowers a CDL+TDL based augmentation technique in order to boost the learning performance of the DL model. Numerical results show that CDL+TDL, 5G-only-CDL, and WiFi-only-TDL augmentation approaches achieve 87.59%, 81.63%, 79.21% accuracy on unobserved data while TDL/CDL augmentation technique and no augmentation approach result in 77.81% and 74.84% accuracy on unobserved data, respectively.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWireless World Research and Trends MagazineSame topicPower Line Communications and NoiseFrench-language works237,207