MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078293442 · doi:10.1515/jmc.2010.001

Factor-4 and 6 compression of cyclotomic subgroups of and

2010· article· en· W2078293442 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

VenueJournal of Mathematical Cryptology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPairingExponentiationMathematicsDiscrete logarithmFinite fieldMultiplicative groupPrime (order theory)Elliptic curveCryptographyOrder (exchange)EmbeddingPrime factorDiscrete mathematicsMultiplicative functionCombinatoricsPure mathematicsAlgorithmPublic-key cryptographyComputer scienceMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bilinear pairings derived from supersingular elliptic curves of embedding degrees 4 and 6 over finite fields 𝔽 2 m and 𝔽 3 m , respectively, have been used to implement pairing-based cryptographic protocols. The pairing values lie in certain prime-order subgroups of the cyclotomic subgroups of orders 2 2 m + 1 and 3 2 m – 3 m + 1, respectively, of the multiplicative groups and . It was previously known how to compress the pairing values over characteristic two fields by a factor of 2, and the pairing values over characteristic three fields by a factor of 6. In this paper, we show how the pairing values over characteristic two fields can be compressed by a factor of 4. Moreover, we present and compare several algorithms for performing exponentiation in the prime-order subgroups using the compressed representations. In particular, in the case where the base is fixed, we expect to gain at least a 54% speed up over the fastest previously known exponentiation algorithm that uses factor-6 compressed representations.

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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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