MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005734726 · doi:10.1109/mwc.2007.4396941

Self-healing group-wise key distribution schemes with time-limited node revocation for wireless sensor networks

2007· article· en· W2005734726 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Wireless Communications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRekeyingComputer scienceComputer networkHash functionGroup keyOverhead (engineering)Distributed computingNode (physics)Hash chainKey distributionWireless sensor networkCommunication in small groupsPublic-key cryptographyKey managementComputer securityEncryption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article two novel group-wise key distribution schemes with time-limited node revocation are introduced for secure group communications in wireless sensor networks. The proposed key distribution schemes are based on two different hash chain structures, dual directional hash chain and hash binary tree. Their salient security properties include self-healing rekeying message distribution, which features a periodic one-way rekeying function with efficient tolerance for lost rekeying messages; and time-limited dynamic node attachment and detachment. Security evaluation shows that the proposed key distribution schemes generally satisfy the requirement of group communications in WSNs with lightweight communication and computation overhead, and are robust under poor communication channel quality.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.244 · 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