Federated Learning-based MARL for Strengthening Physical-Layer Security in B5G Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores the application of a federated learning-based multi-agent reinforcement learning (MARL) strategy to enhance physical-layer security (PLS) in a multi-cellular network within the context of beyond 5G networks. At each cell, a base station (BS) operates as a deep reinforcement learning (DRL) agent that interacts with the surrounding environment to maximize the secrecy rate of legitimate users in the presence of an eavesdropper. This eavesdropper attempts to intercept the confidential information shared between the BS and its authorized users. The DRL agents are deemed to be federated since they only share their network parameters with a central server and not the private data of their legitimate users. Two DRL approaches, deep Q-network (DQN) and Reinforce deep policy gradient (RDPG), are explored and compared. The results demonstrate that RDPG converges more rapidly than DQN. In addition, we demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms the distributed DRL approach. Furthermore, the outcomes illustrate the trade-off between security and complexity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".