A Repeated Coalition Formation Game for Physical Layer Security Aware Wireless Communications With Third-Party Intelligent Reflecting Surfaces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we introduce third-party intelligent reflecting surfaces (TIRSs) into the physical layer security aware wireless communication system, where a central legitimate transmitter is designed to transmit secret signals to a group of legitimate receivers in the presence of the threat from an active eavesdropper (EV). Due to the channel reshaping ability of TIRSs, they are able to not only help legitimate pairs (LPs) enhance the secure transmission rate but also assist EV in improving the eavesdropping performance. Furthermore, with the potential selfishness, TIRSs may dynamically choose to ally with LPs or EV in exchange for potential benefits (e.g., payoffs). This leads to complex dynamic ally-adversary relationships among LPs, EV, and TIRSs under unpredictable wireless channel conditions. To address this issue, we formulate a repeated coalition formation game (RCFG) with dynamic decision-making to model the long-term strategic interactions among LPs, EV, and TIRSs. In particular, we theoretically analyze the existence of Nash equilibrium in the formulated RCFG, and then propose a switch operations-based coalition selection along with a deep reinforcement learning (DRL)-based approach for obtaining such an equilibrium. Simulations examine the feasibility of the proposed approach and show its superiority over counterparts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".