MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416650094 · doi:10.1109/jsac.2025.3637022

UAV-Assisted Physical Layer Security for Space–Air–Ground Integrated Networks (SAGIN) With Multiple Eavesdroppers

2025· article· en· W4416650094 on OpenAlexafffund
Tinh T. Bui, Dang Van Huynh, Vishal Sharma, Keshav Singh, Octavia A. Dobre, Hyundong Shin, Trung Q. Duong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUAV Applications and Optimization
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsPhysical layerArtificial noiseResource allocationBenchmark (surveying)SecrecyOptimization problemGenetic algorithmResource management (computing)Power control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates a drone (aka UAV)-assisted physical layer security framework for space–air–ground integrated networks (SAGINs) in the presence of multiple eavesdroppers. A single full-duplex UAV is deployed to support satellite-to-ground communications by simultaneously relaying desired signals to legitimate users and transmitting artificial noise to degrade the reception quality of eavesdroppers. To enhance secure connectivity, we formulate a max–min secrecy rate optimization problem that jointly considers sub-channel allocation and power distribution. The sub-channel allocation is optimized using a constrained genetic algorithm, which efficiently handles the combinatorial nature of the problem. Additionally, power allocation is optimized through a nested-loop approach, in which the outer loop employs Bayesian optimization to address complex objective functions, while the inner loop makes the allocation tractable using variable substitutions and approximation methods to overcome non-convexity. The simulation results demonstrate that the proposed method outperforms the benchmark schemes in terms of secrecy performance, particularly under stringent resource and security constraints in SAGINs.

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 score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.787

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal on Selected Areas in CommunicationsSame topicUAV Applications and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207