MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Robust Secure Transmission for IRS-Assisted UAV-ISAC Networks without Eavesdropping CSI

2024· article· en· W4402156859 on OpenAlexaff
Jifa Zhang, Jinlei Xu, Weidang Lu, Nan Zhao, Xianbin Wang, Dusit Niyato

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEavesdroppingComputer scienceComputer networkTransmission (telecommunications)Computer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated sensing and communication (ISAC), is emerging as a promising technology for future mobile networks. This paper studies the robust secure transmission for intelligent reflecting surface (IRS) assisted unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)-ISAC networks without eavesdropping channel state information. Particularly, the UAV, as a dual-functional ISAC base station, serves <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$K$</tex> communication users and senses <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$J$</tex> targets with an IRS. Furthermore, an eavesdropper aims at eavesdropping the private information from the UAV to <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$K$</tex> users. Without eavesdropping channel state information, a secure transmission scheme is proposed to maximize the average achievable rate via jointly designing the transmit power allocation, the scheduling of users and targets, the phase shifts at IRS, and the trajectory and velocity of the UAV. Owing to the non-convexity, an iterative algorithm based on the alternating optimization, the successive convex approximation and the manifold optimization is proposed to obtain a sub-optimal solution. Simulation results verify the effectiveness of the proposed scheme.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.204 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207