MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405811864 · doi:10.1109/mnet.2024.3523181

Toward Mixture-of-Experts Enabled Trustworthy Semantic Communication for 6G Networks

2024· article· en· W4405811864 on OpenAlexaff
Jiayi He, Xiaofeng Luo, Jiawen Kang, Hongyang Du, Zehui Xiong, Ci Chen, Dusit Niyato, Xuemin Shen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Network · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIoT and Edge/Fog Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTrustworthinessComputer networkComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Semantic Communication (SemCom) plays a pivotal role in 6G networks, offering a viable solution for future efficient communication. Through nonlinear mapping of semantic representations, Deep Learning (DL)-based semantic communications further enhance communication efficiency. However, the vulnerability of DL models to security threats, such as adversarial attacks, poses significant challenges for practical applications of SemCom systems. These vulnerabilities allow attackers to tamper with messages and eavesdrop on private information, especially in wireless communication scenarios. Although existing defenses attempt to address specific threats, they often fail to simultaneously handle multiple heterogeneous attacks. To overcome this limitation, we propose a novel Mixture-of-Experts (MoE)-based SemCom system, comprising a gating network and multiple experts, each specializing in different security challenges. The gating network adaptively selects suitable experts to counter heterogeneous attacks based on user-defined security requirements. Multiple experts collaborate to accomplish semantic communication tasks while meeting the security requirements of users. A case study in vehicular networks demonstrates the efficacy of the MoE-based SemCom system. Simulation results show that the proposed MoE-based SemCom system effectively mitigates concurrent heterogeneous attacks, with minimal impact on downstream task accuracy.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE NetworkSame topicIoT and Edge/Fog ComputingFrench-language works237,207