MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136157644 · doi:10.1109/wcnc.2009.4917570

An Efficient Authentication and Key Management Protocol for Hierarchical Ad Hoc Sensor Networks

2009· article· en· W2136157644 on OpenAlexaff
Ali Fanian, Mehdi Berenjkoub, T. Aaron Gulliver

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity in Wireless Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWireless ad hoc networkComputer networkKey managementMobile ad hoc networkVehicular ad hoc networkDistributed computingAuthentication (law)CryptographyPublic-key cryptographyKey (lock)Wireless sensor networkAd hoc wireless distribution serviceOptimized Link State Routing ProtocolComputer securityEncryptionTelecommunicationsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite extensive research on flat ad hoc networks, meeting satisfactory security levels in sensor networks presents many problems. The main reason is that these networks are typically designed based on hierarchal structures. In this paper, we propose an efficient scheme for authentication and key management in hierarchical ad hoc sensor networks using symmetric polynomials. In the proposed method, the processing requirements and traffic load are proportional to the processing capability and required bandwidth in each layer. An ad hoc node at the lowest level of the hierarchy uses symmetric cryptography. With more processing capabilities, entities in higher layers use public key cryptography. Performance results show the superiority of the proposed method in comparison with previous approaches developed for hierarchical ad hoc sensor 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.295
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSecurity in Wireless Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207