跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+7272新增论文
+6090其中 AI 相关
+125已有论文修订
+122新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-05 22:41 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-05 12:13各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-04 22:51 — 2026-11-05 22:51(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-05 22:41最近发现新增版本:2026-11-05 12:13库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-05 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

15,949 已收录论文13,765 AI 相关3,571 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-05 22:35(北京时间)
新论文 · v1arXiv:2611.04369

Benchmarking Unsupervised Jamming Detection in 5G Open RAN

Sneihil Gopal, Fernando J. Cintron, Richard A. Rouil

Radio Frequency (RF) jamming threatens fifth-generation (5G) networks. Open Radio Access Network (Open RAN) telemetry enables jamming detection without dedicated spectrum monitoring equipment, but labeled attack data are rarely available across deployments, motivating unsupervised detectors. Comparing such detectors across algorithmic families, however, remains difficult without ground-truth labels. This paper benchmarks statistical and reconstruction-based unsupervised jamming detectors using a symmetric evaluation interface that combines detection confidence and temporal interval coherence into a detector-independent composite score. We compare a Statistical Ensemble Method (SEM) detector against Vanilla, Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM), and Variational Autoencoder (VAE) baselines on Key Performance Indicator (KPI) telemetry from ten heterogeneous 5G environments with fixed and variable jamming bursts and dynamic jammer gains. Under leave-one-out (LOO) evaluation, SEM achieves a mean composite score of 0.906, compared with 0.688 for the best autoencoder (AE) per fold. Ground-truth validation yields a mean F1-score of 0.918 for SEM, compared with 0.521 for the best AE variant. The composite ranks SEM first in all environments, consistent with F1 rankings. However, in both within-trace and cross-trace evaluation, it fails for detectors that flag far fewer samples than the jamming prevalence, indicating that rankings are reliable only when detection rate matches the expected prevalence.

尚无 AI 解读,展示原文摘要

cs.AI · cs.LG
arXiv ↗PDF ↗