MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7081921328 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2025.3609447

Secure AirComp Federated Learning With STAR–IRS

2025· article· en· W7081921328 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJammingExploitWirelessProcess (computing)Convergence (economics)Channel (broadcasting)Superposition principleArtificial noiseComputation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In wireless environments, over-the-air computation (AirComp) can exploit the superposition nature of the channel to facilitate federated learning (FL). When a large number of Internet of Things (IoT) devices participate in the FL process, employing a simultaneously transmitting and reflecting (STAR) intelligent reflecting surface (IRS) can significantly improve FL aggregation performance by enabling wider user participation. However, the STAR–IRS may also introduce substantial security risks as eavesdroppers can also enjoy the benefits of STAR–IRS. In this article, a secure design that enhances the mean-squared error (MSE) performance of the basestation (BS) while disrupting the eavesdropper’s performance is proposed. The BS transmits a jamming noise to the eavesdropper on the same frequency band that devices transmit their local models to the BS. An optimization problem is formulated to minimize the aggregation error at the BS while ensuring the error exceeds a certain threshold at the eavesdropper. Then, a multistep procedure, utilizing alternating optimization (AO) and difference-of-convex (DC) algorithm, is proposed to solve this problem. Numerical results demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed solution, resulting in low MSE and fast convergence in the learning process for the BS, while also deteriorating the eavesdropper’s learning and detection performance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.702
Threshold uncertainty score0.427

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207