| Literature DB >> 35009912 |
Ruijie Guo1, Chunling Fu2, Yong Jin1, Zhentao Hu1, Lin Zhou1.
Abstract
This paper considers the physical layer security (PLS) of a simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT) relay communication system composed of a legitimate source-destination pair and some eavesdroppers. Supposing a disturbance of channel status information (CSI) between relay and eavesdroppers in a bounded ellipse, we intend to design a robust beamformer to maximum security rate in the worst case on the constraints of relay energy consumption. To handle this non-convex optimization problem, we introduce a slack variable to transform the original problem into two sub-problems firstly, then an algorithm employing a semidefinite relaxation (SDR) technique and S-procedure is proposed to tackle above two sub-problems. Although our study was conducted in the scene of a direct link among source, destination, and eavesdroppers that is non-existing, we demonstrate that our conclusions can be easily extended to the scene for which a direct link among source, destination and eavesdroppers exist. Numerical simulation results compared with the benchmark scheme are provided to prove the effectiveness and superior performance of our algorithm.Entities:
Keywords: SWIPT; energy harvest; physical layer security; robust optimization; worst case optimization
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35009912 PMCID: PMC8749935 DOI: 10.3390/s22010370
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1The SWIPT-assisted relay communication network model.
Figure 2Power splitting receiver architecture.
Simulation parameter setup.
| Paramates | Notation | Typical Value |
|---|---|---|
| Standard Distance |
|
|
| Path loss exponent |
|
|
| Channel mismatch bound |
|
|
| Power splitting ratio |
|
|
| Fade coefficient |
|
|
| Energy collection efficiency |
|
|
| Circular area of radius R |
|
|
| Power of source |
|
|
| Noise variance of relay |
|
|
| Noise variance of baseband |
|
|
| Noise variance of receiver |
|
|
| Noise variance of eavesdropper |
|
|
Figure 3The secrecy rate vs. the number of iterations (N = 10, K = 5).
Figure 4The secrecy rate vs. and (N = 10, K = 5).
Figure 5The secrecy rate vs. (N = 20, K = 8).
Figure 6The secrecy rate vs. (N = 15, K = 5).
Figure 7The secrecy rate vs. the number of relays (K = 1).
Figure 8The secrecy rate vs. (N = 10, K = 5).