Effects of CSI Knowledge on Secrecy of Threshold-Selection Decode-and-Forward Relaying
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers secrecy of a three node cooperative wireless system in the presence of a passive eavesdropper. The threshold-selection decode-and-forward relay is considered, which can decode the source message correctly only if a predefined signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is achieved. The effects of channel state information (CSI) availability on secrecy outage probability (SOP) and ergodic secrecy rate (ESR) are investigated, and closed-form expressions are derived. Diversity is achieved from the direct and relaying paths both at the destination and at the eavesdropper by combinations of maximal-ratio combining and selection combining schemes. An asymptotic analysis is provided when each hop SNR is the same in the balanced case and when it is different in the unbalanced case. The analysis shows that both hops can be a bottleneck for secure communication; however, they do not affect the secrecy identically. While it is observed that CSI knowledge can improve secrecy, the amount of improvement for SOP is more when the required rate is low and for ESR when the operating SNR is also low. It is also shown that the source to eavesdropper link SNR is more crucial for secure communication.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".