MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046148580 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2008.4564848

On the nonlinearity profile of cryptographic Boolean functions

2008· article· en· W2046148580 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueConference proceedings - Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoolean functionCryptographyComputer scienceNonlinear systemCryptographic primitiveTheoretical computer scienceCryptographic protocolAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Boolean functions play a major role in the construction of symmetric key primitives such as block ciphers, stream ciphers and hash functions. The security of these primitives depends on the cryptographic properties of the Boolean functions used in its construction. Various criteria, including balance, nonlinearity, resiliency and algebraic immunity, have been proposed for measuring the cryptographic strength of Boolean functions. Let criterion C denote the cryptographic property of interest. We define the C-profile of the Boolean function as a measure that shows how this criterion degrades when we fix a subset of the input coordinates of the function. This is interesting from a cryptanalytic point of view, since fixing the coordinates of a cryptosystem is a well known cryptanalysis method. In this paper, we introduce this concept and apply it to the nonlinearity property of the cryptographic Boolean function.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.815

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.184 · 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