MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Jamming Attacks and Mitigation in Transfer Learning Enabled 5G RAN Slicing

2024· article· en· W4402159228 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicWireless Signal Modulation Classification
Canadian institutionsEricsson (Canada)University of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRanJammingSlicingComputer scienceTransfer of learningComputer securityComputer networkArtificial intelligenceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Radio access technology is crucial in both 5G and 6G cellular networks, providing differentiated services that demand reliability, low latency, and high throughput. To meet these requirements, machine learning (ML) has demonstrated considerable progress by facilitating resource allocation. However, these ML techniques can be susceptible to attacks, and the jamming attack is one of the most considered attacks in the literature, disrupting network functionality by sending interference signals. This paper, to the best of our knowledge for the first time, examines the vulnerability of radio access networks (RANs) to jamming attacks on resource allocation of a transfer reinforcement learning (TRL) based system and provides a mitigation approach to such attacks. A system model is presented for RAN slicing, followed by an introduction of the TRL algorithm for resource allocation. Afterward, we investigate covert patterned jamming attack (CPJA) on the TRL algorithm in downlink communication which decreases system throughput by 17% and 38.14% in the expert and learner agents and increases latency by 7.36% and 9.37% respectively. In addition, we propose a neural network (NN) solution to mitigate the CPJA trained on the network side and provide the trained NN model to the users' equipment (UEs) to eliminate interference from the signal by the filter. The trained NN is applied to predict the future activity of the interference generated by the attacker. Attack mitigation reduces the impact of the attack while the system's throughput suffers a 6% and 1.8% degradation, and its latency increases by 6.5% and 3.83% compared to the original system for expert and learner agents, 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.

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 score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.294

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.232 · 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