Performance Evaluation of Free Space Optics Laser Communications for

5G and Beyond Secure Network Connections

Peppino Fazio

1,2 a

, Mauro Tropea

3 b

, Miralem Mehic

4,2 c

, Floriano De Rango

3 d

and Miroslav Voznak

2 e

Department of Molecular Sciences and Nanosystems, Ca’ Foscari University, Via Torino 155, 30172, Mestre (VE), Italy

VSB – Technical University of Ostrava, 17, Listopadu 2172/15, Ostrava, 70833, Czechia

Department DIMES, University of Calabria, via P. Bucci 39/C, Arcavacata di Rende (CS), 87036, Italy

Department of Telecommunications, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Sarajevo, Zmaja od Bosne bb,

Sarajevo, 71000, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Keywords:

Quantum Communications, FSO, Photon, SNR, BER, Laser, Optics, Channel Modeling.

Abstract:

Free Space Optics (FSO) represent a promising technology for secure communications in several types of

architectures: from Quantum Key Distribution Networks (QKDNs) to satellite communications. In this paper,

in particular, we take into account terrestrial point-to-point laser communications and evaluate the performance

in terms of Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) and Bit Error Rate (BER), taking into account different scenarios, that

can reﬂect real situations in which long distances can be reached in a secure way, guaranteeing an acceptable

level of BER. So, after a huge campaign of simulations, we would like to let the scientiﬁc community know

which are the theoretical limits that such kind of communications can reach. We take into account standard

telescopes parameters (available today in the market), while conﬁguring several real situations, in function of,

for example, bit-rate, visibility, link distance, etc. A brief survey of the existing works is given, then a clearer

performance evaluation of terrestrial FSO links is proposed.

1 INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, the classical cybersecurity algorithms

have been affected by the progress in quantum com-

puting, giving to machines the possibility to execute

computational operations which were unpredictable

several decades ago. So, classical security protocols

and algorithms are becoming inadequate to protect

data, given the huge power of quantum computers

(Adhikari et al., 2021). The secret keys exchange has

become critical, with the needing of a complete in-

novation, in terms of robustness to external attacks

(Rosch-Grace and Straub, 2021).

Free Space Optics (FSO) represent a promising

technology that can be used also in satellite environ-

ment for future advanced telecommunications where

algorithms of call admission (De Rango et al., 2008)

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2590-034X

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0593-5254

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2697-1756

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4901-6233

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5135-7980

and opportune scheduling schemes (Tropea et al.,

2021) are important techniques to be taken into ac-

count.

For the reasons above, the Quantum Key Distri-

bution (QKD) paradigm has become really promis-

ing, given its theoretical impossibility to be broken

by external attacks (Zhou et al., 2022), (Mehic et al.,

2019). There are several works proposed in literature

about QKD Networks (QKDNs), but most of them

take into account what happens from the 3

OSI layer

and above. In this paper, instead, we want to give to

the scientiﬁc community the possibility to know what

happens at the PHY layer, by deeply analysing which

performance, in terms of photons detection accuracy,

can be reached by considering several parameters that

are useful and suitable to describe real scenarios.

In particular, we are focusing on terrestrial point-

to-point communications, although the idea can be

easily extended to satellite QKD communications (Vu

et al., 2022), (Ai et al., 2020), (Elser et al., 2015). The

core of this paper consists in the proposal of a theo-

retical channel model for photons detection, from a

generic source and a generic destination, and a con-

Fazio, P., Tropea, M., Mehic, M., De Rango, F. and Voznak, M.

Performance Evaluation of Free Space Optics Laser Communications for 5G and Beyond Secure Networ k Connections.

DOI: 10.5220/0012079700003546

In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications (SIMULTECH 2023), pages 251-258

ISBN: 978-989-758-668-2; ISSN: 2184-2841

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

251

sequent performance analysis of what happens to the

PHY optical channel, under several and different con-

ditions. This paper wants to be a starting point for a

more complex stochastic modeling, which can be eas-

ily implemented in several simulators, such as (Cam-

panile et al., 2020), (Chen et al., 2022), (Mehic et al.,

2020).

The main contribution of this paper, in addition to

the numerical performance evaluation, is represented

by accounting for several physical parameters, which

have been neglected or disregarded in other works

(e.g. device diameters, pointing error, scintillation,

scope efﬁciency, etc.), or not considered together.

As regards the structure of the paper, the next sec-

tion gives a detailed overview of the main scientiﬁc

works existing in literature, Section 3 introduces the

proposed theoretical model, with the speciﬁcation of

several terms and parameters, directly related to the

considered devices. Section 4 provide details about

the main obtained results, in terms of SNR and BER,

and, at the end, Section 5 concludes the paper, un-

derlining the main reached results and future devel-

opments.

2 RELATED WORK ON QKD AND

FSO CHANNEL MODELING

The channel modeling issues is a key topic due to the

fundamental importance of the channel in every com-

munication network. Many studies have been pro-

posed by researchers about the modeling of the chan-

nel in the different networks such as satellite plat-

forms (Tropea and De Rango, 2022), acoustic com-

munications (De Rango et al., 2012), vehicular net-

works (Fazio et al., 2015). In this section, several lit-

erature contributions will be overviewed. Over the

last ten years, free space optical (FSO) communica-

tion has grown more fascinating and in the literature a

lot of works have been proposed by scientiﬁc commu-

nity. This type of communication covers both indoor

and outdoor environments and it is important to con-

sider the effects of the weather on the signal propaga-

tion. Some works try to review the proposed channel

models able to taking into account the weather and

channel condition such as scattering, absorption, fog,

rain, haze, snow (Jarangal and Dhawan, 2018).

The different effects introduced by atmosphere in

the FSO channel are described in (Kaushal et al.,

2017). The atmospheric turbulent channel models

have been discussed based on various empirical scin-

tillation data of the atmosphere. Different statistical

models to describe the irradiance statistics of the re-

ceived signal due to randomly varying turbulent at-

mospheric channel, lognormal, negative exponential,

gamma-gamma, etc. have been discussed and dif-

ferent techniques to mitigate these phenomena in the

channel are shown.

In (Esmail et al., 2016) the effects of fog im-

pairment is analysed by authors in order to propose

a channel model for characterizing the FSO com-

munication able to provide improvement in the sys-

tem performance. They propose a model based on

a closed formulation and evaluate the overall perfor-

mance both theoretically and numerically, in terms of

average signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and outage prob-

ability. Their results have showed that under light and

moderate fog, the FSO system performance is accept-

able for short link length in hundreds of meters.

This type of technology is also used in satellite,

high altitude platforms (HAPs) and unmanned aerial

vehicles (UAVs), so many contributions are related

to these neworks such as (Ivanov et al., 2021), (Guo

et al., 2022).

In (Najaﬁ et al., 2020) the authors investigate the

channel between a central unit and a swarm of UAVs

that communicate also in critical conditions that do

not permit to correctly align the lens and so the laser

results in a non-orthogonal beam due also to the ran-

dom ﬂuctuations of the position and orientation of

the UAV. They try to derive corresponding statistical

models for different weather condition and UAV po-

sition proved by simulations that have validated the

accuracy of the presented analysis and provide impor-

tant insights for system design.

In (Ivanov et al., 2022) a testebed emulator for

satellite channel has been proposed able to take into

account the effect of atmospheric including scintilla-

tions and clouds.

A simpliﬁed approach for modeling the received

power dynamics of the atmospheric FSO channel de-

veloped based on the statistics of received power mea-

surements from a maritime-mobile link, a land- mo-

bile link, and a satellite downlink is presented in (Ep-

ple, 2010). The proposed approach is easy to de-

velop without requiring deep knowledge of the phys-

ical channel.

The performance evaluation of different type of

channel models is reported in (Barua et al., 2011).

This evaluation is based on different simulation pa-

rameters such as detector threshold level, probability

of detection, mean fade time, number of fades, BER,

and SNR The paper tries to investigate the most efﬁ-

cient PDF model. It compares channel model such as

Rayleigh, Log-normal, Rician and Nakagami-m dis-

tribution showing that these are valid in atmosphere

turbulence but the Gamma–gamma model performs

better for all regimes from weak to strong turbulence

SIMULTECH 2023 - 13th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

252

region. So, their suggestion is to prefer gamma-

gamma model in this type of atmosphere conditions

in FSO propagation.

On the basis of these works proposed in literature

our intent in this paper is to provide a FSO channel

model proposal deriving a closed expression able to

take into account error probability related to the pho-

ton transmission in a FSO channel.

3 OUR PROPOSED FSO

CHANNEL MODEL

In this section, we will derive a closed expression to

evaluate the error probability of a photon transmis-

sion between a source and a destination in Free Space

Optics (FSO) channels. The relation between SNR

and BER is very important, because it gives to the

researchers the possibility to collect some important

statistics about PHY channel degradation during time

(as shown in the next section).

First of all, let us consider a couple of nodes, one

transmitting (n

) a photon and the other one receiving

it (n

) on a FSO link.

Figure 1 shows the typical considered scenario.

As in (Zhao and Alouini, 2019), we indicate the

pointing error angle as θ, assuming that it follows

a Beckmann distribution (Simon and Alouini, 2001).

From the proposals in (Rahman et al., 2021), (Kupfer-

man and Arnon, 2018), we can write that the received

power, due to path loss, on the n

side is:

P(n

,θ) = K ·G(n

) ·L(θ), (1)

where:

K = η(q) ·η(n

) ·η(n

) ·P(n

) ·G(n

)·

Loss(dist)

dist



4π



(2)

G(n

) is the telescope gain of n

, L(θ) = e

−G(n

)·θ

is the pointing loss factor and K is a constant value,

given that it is evaluated by ﬁxed terms, as the quan-

tum efﬁciency (η(q), with q the elementary charge),

the efﬁciencies at the sender and receiver sides respec-

tively (η(n

), η(n

)), transmission power (P(n

)),

source telescope gain (G(n

)), the atmospheric loss in

function of distance dist (Loss(dist)) and the wave-

length λ. Knowing the particular shape of the in-

volved telescopes (mainly the diameter), we can ob-

tain speciﬁc values for G(n

) and G(n

) (Kamal

et al., 2022):

G(n

) = G(n

) =



π ·T

diam



, (3)

where T

diam

is the telescope diameter: in our work we

consider the same diameter for each optical device,

typically 35cm for the main mirror (Saito et al., 2021).

From (Jia et al., 2006), (Wainright et al., 2005),

it is also known that the function Loss(d), which de-

pends on scattering (the light traveling in free space

impacts on the particles suspended in the air) and ab-

sorption (effect related to the molecular makeup of the

atmosphere), can be expressed by the Beer’s law:

Loss(d) = e

−(α+β)·

, (4)

where α is the scattering coefﬁcient and β is the ab-

sorption coefﬁcient. The second one can be neglected,

due to the fact that manufacturers of FSO devices set

them to use wavelengths that fall in the ranges where

the absorption from H

O and CO

are minimal. So,

in conclusion, β is equal to 0 and the α term can be

expressed by the Kruse formula (Jia et al., 2006):

α =

3.91



550



−q

, (5)

where V is the visibility (expressed in km), λ is ex-

pressed in [nm], q can assume the values 0.585(V )

1/3

if V < 6km, 1.3 if 6km < V < 50km and 1.6 if

V >50km.

The expression of the received power by n

is now

explicitly derived and, in order to obtain the Bit Error

Rate (BER, our ﬁnal goal in this subsection), we need

to make an assumption regarding the noise power in

the FSO channel, so the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR)

can be ﬁrstly derived. Equation (2) represents only the

path loss component of the signal while, especially in

FSO, the noise plays also a key role.

In particular, in FSO environments, there are sev-

eral types of noise (N

will indicate the noise power:

it is the variance but we assume that it is a 0-mean

process, so the variance is equivalent to the related

power) impacting on the overall performance of the

channel (Xu et al., 2021), (Moosavi and Saghaﬁfar,

2018); the formal terms referred to them are back-

ground, thermal and quantum noises (Ghassemlooy

et al., 2019):

back

2 ·q ·I

back

·R

R ·I

, N

4 ·k

·T ·R

R ·R

·I

2 ·q ·R

R ·I

(6)

where, for the N

back

background noise, q is the el-

ementary charge, I

back

is the background irradiance,

is the symbol rate, R is the responsivity of the pho-

todetector, I

is the average received irradiance. For

the N

thermal noise, k

is the Boltzmann’s constant,

T is the ambient temperature, R

is the load resistance

Performance Evaluation of Free Space Optics Laser Communications for 5G and Beyond Secure Network Connections

253

Figure 1: The typical scenario of FSO p2p communications.

of the receiver circuit. So we can consider the total

noise as N

= N

back

+ N

So, the given SNR for the transmission of a photon

between n

and n

will be:

SNR(n

,θ,dist) =

P(n

,θ)

. (7)

Clearly, there are several parameters from which the

expression of the SNR in equation (7) will depend,

and we indicated the most important, such as n

, θ

and dist.

The last step to have a closed expression for the

BER, then, will be the relationship between SNR

and BER, which depends on the adopted modulation

(Stallings, 2007): in our work we consider several

types of modulations, typically used to transmit in-

formation bits over laser (Basudewa et al., 2020).

In the case of the On-Off Keying (OOK) with No

Return to Zero (No-NRZ) signaling and we can write

that:

BER

OOK−NRZ

,θ,dist) =

·er f c



2 ·

√

SNR(n

,θ,dist)



(8)

In the case of the OOK with Return to Zero (RZ),

the equation is:

BER

OOK−RZ

,θ,dist) =

·er f c



SNR(n

,θ,dist)



(9)

For the Pulse Position Modulation (PPM, referred

to the transmission of one data bit), the expression is:

BER

PPM

,θ,dist) =

·er f c



log(4)

2 ·

√

SNR(n

,θ,dist)



(10)

At the end, for the N Pulse Amplitude Modula-

tion (PAM-N) (Sakib and Liboiron-Ladouceur, 2013),

where N > 1 is the number of amplitude levels, we

have:

BER

PAM−N

,θ,dist) =

·er f c

log2N ·SNR(n

,θ,dist)

2 ·

√

2 ·(N −1)

(11)

SIMULTECH 2023 - 13th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

254

At this point, we have the elements to relate the BER

to several system and environmental parameters.

4 SIMULATION RESULTS

Based on the model introduced in section 3, we car-

ried out several simulation campaigns, in order to ob-

tain some important statistics on the effective theo-

retical SNR and BER. Table 1 summarises the main

parameters of the considered point-to-point system.

Figure 2: The power on the receiver side, with a visibility

of 10 km and for different TX and distance values.

Figure 2 shows the trend of the instantaneous re-

ceived (RX) power, in function of the transmitted

(TX) one, for an average visibility of 10km and a

path distance of {13, ...,17}km. It can be seen how

the received signal strength decreases for higher dis-

tances and increases of higher transmission power

(from 3mW to 100mW) and there is a huge path-loss

(for a maximum TX power of 100mW, the maximum

received power is about 9mW).

Figure 3: SNR at the receiver side, with a visibility of 10

km and for different TX and distance values.

Figure 3 shows also the trend of the instantaneous

SNR at the RX side: as expected, the trend is the same

of the previous case, although the derivative positive

trend decreases for higher TX power values.

Figure 4: (Q)BER at the receiver side, with a visibility of

10 km and for different TX and distance values.

Figure 4 shows the trend of the BER (or Quan-

tum BER, QBER, if we refer to a photon). It can be

seen that increasing TX power may lead to a negligi-

ble BER, but if the distance is too high, BER tends to

be higher, because of the involved physical effects.

Figure 5: (Q)BER at the receiver side, with visibility of 10

km and distance of 15 km for different modulation schemes.

Figure 5 considers different modulation schemes

used in FSO communications: the OOK with NRZ

presents the worst trend (highest BER), while there

is no noticeable differences among the other schemes

(OOK-RZ, PPM, and PAM-N).

Figure 6 shows the trend of the (Q)BER at the re-

ceiver side for a ﬁxed scenario and different values

of equivalent load impedance (resistance); the typical

value is R

=50Ω, but it can be seen that an increasing

offers to the system a better performance in terms

of (Q)BER.

Performance Evaluation of Free Space Optics Laser Communications for 5G and Beyond Secure Network Connections

255

Table 1: Simulation parameters.

Parameter Description Value

Quantum efﬁciency 0.1

λ Wavelenght 976e-9 (m)

Telescopes diameter 0.35 (m)

Optical efﬁciency (source side) 0.9

Optical efﬁciency (destination side) 0.9

p,e

Pointing error angle - elevation Gaussian (µ

=1e-7, σ

=1.44e-14)

p,a

Pointing error angle - azimuth Gaussian (µ

=3e-7, σ

=1.44e-14)

q Elementary charge (Coulomb) 1.602e-19

Average received irradiance 0.001

R Photodetector responsivity 1

back

Background irradiance 4·π ·0.62·(1e-6)+(5.5e-5)

Transmission bitrate (B/s) 10e6, variable

Boltzmann constant 1.380649e-19

T Temperature in °K 300

Load resistance at n

(Ω) 50, variable

Figure 6: (Q)BER at the receiver side, with visibility of 10

km and distance of 15 km for different R

values.

The last ﬁgure (7) illustrates how the transmission

speed inﬂuences the overall (Q)BER: it can be seen

that higher TX speeds result in higher errors; those

trends are very important because they give the possi-

bility to know, in advance, the expected channel per-

formance (knowing the main scenario parameters).

So, it is possible to perform a kind of link-budget if

new devices should be installed in several strategic

positions. Clearly, for Gbps speeds, from the ﬁgure

the (Q)BER seems to be too high, but we would like

to underlined that those performances are reachable

for a visibility of 10km and a covered link distance of

15km (a very critical scenario for FSO communica-

tions).

Figure 7: (Q)BER at the receiver side, with visibility of 10

km and distance of 15 km for different R

values.

5 CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE

WORKS

In this paper we proposed a simple FSO Laser chan-

nel modeling, taking into account the main phenom-

ena that impact on those communication scenarios.

This work is just a demonstration (performance evalu-

ation) of what kind of performance can be reached, in

function of distance, visibility and other kind of phys-

ical parameters (modulation, transmission rate, back-

ground noise level). From our point of view, this con-

tribution represents the starting point for real topology

link budgets, especially with the advent of quantum

SIMULTECH 2023 - 13th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

256

communications in FSO scenario, able to secure tra-

ditional Internet trafﬁc. We demonstrated, by setting

a typical scenario, which limits can be reached by the

considered FSO technology.

REFERENCES

Adhikari, T., Ghosh, A., Khan, A. K., Laha, S., Mitra,

P., and Karmakar, R. (2021). Quantum resistance

for cryptographic keys in classical cryptosystems: A

study on qkd protocols. In 2021 12th International

Conference on Computing Communication and Net-

working Technologies (ICCCNT), pages 1–7. IEEE.

Ai, X., Malaney, R., and Ng, S. X. (2020). A reconcilia-

tion strategy for real-time satellite-based qkd. IEEE

Communications Letters, 24(5):1062–1066.

Barua, B., Hossain, M. M., Islam, M. R., and Bashar, M. K.

(2011). Performance evaluation of different type of

channel models in fso communication. International

Journal of Science and Advanced Technology, 1(5).

Basudewa, M., Bagaskara, Z., Damita, S., Putra, R., and

Ahmadi, D. (2020). Bit error rate performance analy-

sis for free space optic communication. In IOP Con-

ference Series: Materials Science and Engineering,

volume 850, page 012056. IOP Publishing.

Campanile, L., Gribaudo, M., Iacono, M., Marulli, F., and

Mastroianni, M. (2020). Computer network simula-

tion with ns-3: A systematic literature review. Elec-

tronics, 9:272.

Chen, L., Zhang, Z., Zhao, M., Yu, K., and Liu, S. (2022).

Apr-qkdn: A quantum key distribution network rout-

ing scheme based on application priority ranking. En-

tropy, 24(11).

De Rango, F., Tropea, M., Fazio, P., and Marano, S. (2008).

Call admission control for aggregate mpeg-2 trafﬁc

over multimedia geo-satellite networks. IEEE Trans-

actions on Broadcasting, 54(3):612–622.

De Rango, F., Veltri, F., and Fazio, P. (2012). A multipath

fading channel model for underwater shallow acoustic

communications. In 2012 IEEE International Con-

ference on Communications (ICC), pages 3811–3815.

IEEE.

Elser, D., Gunthner, K., Khan, I., Stiller, B., Marquardt, C.,

Leuchs, G., Saucke, K., Trondle, D., Heine, F., Seel,

S., et al. (2015). Satellite quantum communication via

the alphasat laser communication terminal-quantum

signals from 36 thousand kilometers above earth. In

2015 IEEE international conference on space optical

systems and applications (ICSOS), pages 1–4. IEEE.

Epple, B. (2010). Simpliﬁed channel model for simulation

of free-space optical communications. Journal of Op-

tical Communications and networking, 2(5):293–304.

Esmail, M. A., Fathallah, H., and Alouini, M.-S. (2016).

Channel modeling and performance evaluation of fso

communication systems in fog. In 2016 23rd In-

ternational Conference on Telecommunications (ICT),

pages 1–5. IEEE.

Fazio, P., Tropea, M., Sottile, C., and Lupia, A. (2015).

Vehicular networking and channel modeling: a new

markovian approach. In 2015 12th Annual IEEE Con-

sumer Communications and Networking Conference

(CCNC), pages 702–707. IEEE.

Ghassemlooy, Z., Popoola, W., and Rajbhandari, S. (2019).

Optical wireless communications: system and channel

modelling with Matlab®. CRC press.

Guo, W., Zhan, Y., Tsiftsis, T. A., and Yang, L. (2022).

Performance and channel modeling optimization for

hovering uav-assisted fso links. Journal of Lightwave

Technology, 40(15):4999–5012.

Ivanov, H., Hatab, Z., and Leitgeb, E. (2021). Channel

emulation of satellite-to-ground apd-based fso link in

the presence of atmospheric turbulence fading. In

2021 16th International Conference on Telecommuni-

cations (ConTEL), pages 33–36. IEEE.

Ivanov, H., Marzano, F., Leitgeb, E., and Bekhrad, P.

(2022). Testbed emulator of satellite-to-ground fso

downlink affected by atmospheric seeing including

scintillations and clouds. Electronics, 11(7):1102.

Jarangal, E. and Dhawan, D. (2018). Comparison of chan-

nel models based on atmospheric turbulences of fso

system-a review. International Journal of Research

in Electronics and Computer Engineering, 6(1):282–

286.

Jia, Z., Zhu, Q., and Ao, F. (2006). Atmospheric attenu-

ation analysis in the fso link. In 2006 international

conference on communication technology, pages 1–4.

IEEE.

Kamal, M., Khan, J., Khan, Y., Ali, F., Armghan, A.,

Muhammad, F., Ullah, N., and Alotaibi, S. (2022).

Free space optics transmission performance enhance-

ment for sustaining 5g high capacity data services. Mi-

cromachines, 13(8):1248.

Kaushal, H., Jain, V., Kar, S., Kaushal, H., Jain, V., and

Kar, S. (2017). Free-space optical channel models.

Free space optical communication, pages 41–89.

Kupferman, J. and Arnon, S. (2018). Zero-error attacks on a

quantum key distribution fso system. OSA Continuum,

1(3):1079–1086.

Mehic, M., Fazio, P., Rass, S., Maurhart, O., Peev, M.,

Poppe, A., Rozhon, J., Niemiec, M., and Voznak, M.

(2019). A novel approach to quality-of-service pro-

visioning in trusted relay quantum key distribution

networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking,

28(1):168–181.

Mehic, M., Niemiec, M., Rass, S., Ma, J., Peev, M.,

Aguado, A., Martin, V., Schauer, S., Poppe, A.,

Pacher, C., and Voznak, M. (2020). Quantum key dis-

tribution: A networking perspective. ACM Comput.

Surv., 53(5).

Moosavi, S. A. and Saghaﬁfar, H. (2018). Irradiance ﬂuctu-

ations of an indoor fso channel based on hot air cham-

bers. Optik, 173:110–119.

Najaﬁ, M., Ajam, H., Jamali, V., Diamantoulakis, P. D.,

Karagiannidis, G. K., and Schober, R. (2020). Sta-

tistical modeling of the fso fronthaul channel for uav-

based communications. IEEE Transactions on Com-

munications, 68(6):3720–3736.

Performance Evaluation of Free Space Optics Laser Communications for 5G and Beyond Secure Network Connections

257

Rahman, Z., Zafaruddin, S. M., and Chaubey, V. K. (2021).

Performance analysis of optical wireless communi-

cations with aperture averaging over exponentiated

weibull turbulence with pointing errors. Results in Op-

tics, 5:100171.

Rosch-Grace, D. and Straub, J. (2021). Analysis of the ne-

cessity of quantum computing capacity development

for national defense and homeland security. In 2021

IEEE International Symposium on Technologies for

Homeland Security (HST), pages 1–8. IEEE.

Saito, Y., Takenaka, H., Shiratama, K., Munemasa, Y.,

Carrasco-Casado, A., Trinh, P. V., Suzuki, K., Fuse,

T., Takahashi, Y., Kubo-oka, T., et al. (2021). Re-

search and development of a transportable optical

ground station in nict: The results of the ﬁrst perfor-

mance test. Frontiers in Physics, 9:636696.

Sakib, M. N. and Liboiron-Ladouceur, O. (2013). A study

of error correction codes for pam signals in data cen-

ter applications. IEEE Photonics Technology Letters,

25(23):2274–2277.

Simon, M. K. and Alouini, M.-S. (2001). Digital communi-

cation over fading channels. New York: Wiley.

Stallings, W. (2007). Data and computer communications.

Pearson Education India.

Tropea, M. and De Rango, F. (2022). A comprehensive

review of channel modeling for land mobile satellite

communications. Electronics, 11(5):820.

Tropea, M., De Rango, F., and Santamaria, A. F. (2021).

Design of a two-stage scheduling scheme for dvb-

s2/s2x satellite architecture. IEEE Transactions on

Broadcasting, 67(2):424–437.

Vu, M. Q., Le, H. D., Pham, T. V., and Pham, A. T. (2022).

Toward practical entanglement-based satellite fso/qkd

systems using dual-threshold/direct detection. IEEE

Access, 10:113260–113274.

Wainright, E., Refai, H. H., and Sluss Jr, J. J. (2005). Wave-

length diversity in free-space optics to alleviate fog

effects. In Free-Space Laser Communication Tech-

nologies XVII, volume 5712, pages 110–118. SPIE.

Xu, Z., Xu, G., and Zheng, Z. (2021). Ber and channel

capacity performance of an fso communication sys-

tem over atmospheric turbulence with different types

of noise. Sensors, 21(10):3454.

Zhao, H. and Alouini, M.-S. (2019). On the performance

of quantum key distribution fso systems under a gen-

eralized pointing error model. IEEE Communications

Letters, 23(10):1801–1805.

Zhou, H., Lv, K., Huang, L., and Ma, X. (2022). Quantum

network: security assessment and key management.

IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 30(3):1328–

1339.

SIMULTECH 2023 - 13th International Conference on Simulation and Modeling Methodologies, Technologies and Applications

258