MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964973855 · doi:10.1109/tc.2010.138

Hybrid Binary-Ternary Number System for Elliptic Curve Cryptosystems

2010· article· en· W1964973855 on OpenAlexaff
Jithra Adikari, Vassil S. Dimitrov, Laurent Imbert

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBulgarian Academy of SciencesCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNanyang Technological University
KeywordsScalar multiplicationElliptic curve cryptographyBinary numberHessian form of an elliptic curveElliptic curveTernary operationMathematicsCryptosystemArithmeticInteger (computer science)Scalar (mathematics)Elliptic curve point multiplicationAlgorithmSchoof's algorithmComputer scienceDiscrete mathematicsCryptographyPublic-key cryptographyPure mathematicsEncryptionQuarter periodGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Single and double scalar multiplications are the most computational intensive operations in elliptic curve based cryptosystems. Improving the performance of these operations is generally achieved by means of integer recoding techniques, which aim at minimizing the scalars' density of nonzero digits. The hybrid binary-ternary number system provides both short representations and small density. In this paper, we present three novel algorithms for both single and double scalar multiplication. We present a detailed theoretical analysis, together with timings and fair comparisons over both tripling-oriented Doche-Ichart-Kohel curves and generic Weierstrass curves. Our experiments show that our algorithms are almost always faster than their widely used counterparts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations38
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ComputersSame topicCryptography and Residue ArithmeticFrench-language works237,207