MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125619860 · doi:10.1109/pacrim.2003.1235745

Network processors for communication security: a review

2004· review· en· W2125619860 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

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNetwork Packet Processing and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceFlexibility (engineering)Wireless networkWirelessEmbedded systemBandwidth (computing)Computer networkComputer security modelNetwork securityDesign flowDistributed computingComputer architectureComputer securityTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Network processor units (NPUs) are application specific instruction processors (ASIPs) specialized and optimized to perform different network functionalities. As security is one of the essential network issues, it is better to be implemented using NPUs because of the need for fast processing to achieve high data rates. In this paper, we provide an overview on the use of NPUs for security. There exist three approaches to implement security using NPUs: the look-aside, the flow-through, and the integrated security blocks. Moreover, when we deal with wireless systems, wireless security processor implementation to meet the general design constraints of wireless devices. These constraints include limited bandwidth, low power consumption, and minimized area. In addition, designers of wireless security processors take into account the need for fast processing and flexibility.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.296 · 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