2017
DOI: 10.1109/lwc.2017.2711612
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Spatial Interference Correlation and Jamming on Secrecy in Cellular Networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(19 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
(10 reference statements)
0
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Remark 4 The expressions in Theorem 4.1 are still in intractable forms due to the function U n (δ) defined in (27). However, from the definition of ℓ(·), this function can be upper-bounded as follows (see (17) and (27)):…”
Section: Spatial Correlation Of Interferencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Remark 4 The expressions in Theorem 4.1 are still in intractable forms due to the function U n (δ) defined in (27). However, from the definition of ℓ(·), this function can be upper-bounded as follows (see (17) and (27)):…”
Section: Spatial Correlation Of Interferencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore a natural question to ask is whether placing the receiver close to the boundary, where the interference is less, can enhance PLS. Before looking at the impact of boundaries on the secrecy performance, let us consider the case, where the receiver and eavesdropper are deployed in the infinite plane (or in the bulk of the deployment area), and discuss the impact of interferer's intensity on the probability of secure connectivity, i.e., the joint event of successful decoding at the receiver and failure to decode at the eavesdropper [37], [38]. We assume a single receiver and eavesdropper at fixed and known locations in a homogeneous Poisson field of interferers.…”
Section: Motivation and List Of Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The impact of interference correlation on the probability of secure connectivity in infinite cellular systems has been recently studied in [38]. Over there it is shown that interference correlation plays a significant role in secrecy performance when the typical eavesdropper is located close to the typical user.…”
Section: Motivation and List Of Contributionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…and v w [n] ∼ CN 0, σ 2 vw denote the aggregate received interferences, and z b [n] ∼ CN 0, σ 2 z b and z w [n] ∼ CN 0, σ 2 zw denote the AWGN. We note that v b [n] and v w [n] are usually correlated in practice due to the spatial correlation of the interferences [30][31][32][33], while the correlation between v b [n] and v w [n] does not affect the analysis and results in the paper. We denote the received signal power at Bob and Willie by P b = P a |h ab | 2 /d α ab and P w = P a |h aw | 2 /d α aw , respectively.…”
Section: System Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%