MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Risk-Aware Slicing-Based Security Functions Allocation in LEO Satellite Networks

2025· article· en· W4411949686 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammed Mahyoub, Sami Muhaidat, Halim Yanıkömeroğlu, Güneş Karabulut Kurt

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSlicingSatelliteSatellite broadcastingCommunications satelliteComputer securityComputer networkWorld Wide WebEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The integration of low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite communication into 6G networks promises a transformative impact on global connectivity by expanding coverage to remote regions and enhancing service reliability. However, this new infrastructure also introduces significant security challenges due to its expansive attack surface. To address this concern, we propose a dynamic security functions allocation (SFA) model that optimizes the allocation of security functions (SFs) across satellites while considering computational resource limitations, dynamic topology changes, and the visibility constraints of satellite constellations. Our model leverages the flexibility of 6G network slicing (NS) to share non-critical SFs between slices, reducing resource overhead while maintaining essential security demands. To minimize the risk of sharing highly sensitive SFs between slices, our model employs a nonlinear penalty, which prioritizes minimizing risk by aggressively penalizing high-risk SFs sharing. This dynamic risk management framework assesses the probability and impact of security breaches, ensuring that SFs are shared only when the security risk is acceptable, balancing resource efficiency and security. By dynamically adapting to the network’s operational conditions, our approach provides a robust framework for efficient and secure satellite communication in 6G networks. Simulation results demonstrate the model’s flexibility in managing trade-offs across key network performance metrics.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSatellite Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207