MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116936848 · doi:10.1109/tc.2010.258

Concurrent Error Detection in Montgomery Multiplication over Binary Extension Fields

2010· article· en· W2116936848 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Hariri, Arash Reyhani-Masoleh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Computers · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceScalar multiplicationMultiplication (music)Error detection and correctionElliptic curve cryptographyFinite fieldArithmeticCryptographyFinite field arithmeticElliptic Curve Digital Signature AlgorithmBinary numberElliptic curveParallel computingAlgorithmMathematicsPublic-key cryptographyDiscrete mathematicsEncryption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiplication is one of the most important operations in finite field arithmetic. It is used in cryptographic and coding applications, such as elliptic curve cryptography and Reed-Solomon codes. In this paper, we consider the finite field multiplication used in elliptic curve cryptography and design concurrent error detection circuits. It is shown in the literature that the Montgomery multiplication can be used in cryptography to accelerate the scalar multiplication. Here, we use a parity-based concurrent error detection approach to increase the reliability of different Montgomery multipliers available in the literature. First, we consider bit-serial Montgomery multiplication and propose an error detection circuit. Then, we apply the same technique on the digit-serial Montgomery multiplication. Finally, we consider low time-complexity bit-parallel Montgomery multiplication and design the required components to implement the concurrent error detection circuits. ASIC implementations have been completed to analyze the time and area overheads of the proposed schemes. Also, the error detection capability is investigated by software simulations. We show that our approach results in efficient error detection schemes with small time and area overheads.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations28
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on ComputersSame topicCryptography and Residue ArithmeticFrench-language works237,207