MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097010348 · doi:10.1109/tcsi.2003.808839

Application of impulsive synchronization to communication security

2003· article· en· W2097010348 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 Transactions on Circuits and Systems I Fundamental Theory and Applications · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicChaos control and synchronization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynchronization (alternating current)Scheme (mathematics)CryptosystemFrame (networking)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Transmission (telecommunications)Communications systemStability (learning theory)CryptographyMathematicsComputer networkComputer securityTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, criteria on uniform equi-boundedness and equi-Lagrange stability for impulsive systems are derived. These criteria are used to synchronize two nonidentical chaotic systems by impulsively controlling a nonautonomous second order system, which leads to the development of an induced-message scheme for communication system security. With the scheme, message signals are not transmitted across public channels, but induced at the receiver end. The scheme overcomes the transmission time-frame congestion in impulsive cryptosystems discussed in the literature and improves system security. Simulation results are given to demonstrate the performance of the proposed scheme.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.600

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.227 · 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