MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051780367 · doi:10.1109/syscon.2012.6189541

EIBC: Enhanced Identity-Based Cryptography, a conceptual design

2012· article· en· W2051780367 on OpenAlexaff
Hasen Nicanfar, Victor C. M. Leung

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceKey managementCryptographyEncryptionComputer networkKey (lock)Authentication (law)Overhead (engineering)Network packetKey encapsulationPublic-key cryptographyMulticastComputer securityDistributed computingKey exchangeOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identity-Based Cryptography (IBC) was originally introduced by A. Shamir in 1984 in a signature scheme. IBC was first applied in the encryption and decryption of messages in the Boneh and Franklin model presented in 2001, which forms the basis of our design. In this model, the system has to undergo private key refreshment procedure as part of the key management, which requires multiple control packets that increase the communication overhead. In this paper, we propose Enhanced Identity-Base Cryptography (EIBC), an efficient key management mechanism that minimizes control packets communications. Furthermore, we elucidate how EIBC can be employed in multicast group key managements. We present analysis to show that EIBC simultaneously achieves a high level of system security while handling system key management in an efficiently manner. EIBC can be utilized and implemented in various platforms, e.g., in our efficient authentication and key management schemes for Smart Grid networks.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations10
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207