MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2219863946 · doi:10.1142/s0129054118500089

On an Almost-Universal Hash Function Family with Applications to Authentication and Secrecy Codes

2018· article· en· W2219863946 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHash functionUniversal hashingHash chainCryptographyPerfect hash functionInteger (computer science)SecrecyInformation-theoretic securityDouble hashing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Universal hashing, discovered by Carter and Wegman in 1979, has many important applications in computer science. MMH[Formula: see text], which was shown to be [Formula: see text]-universal by Halevi and Krawczyk in 1997, is a well-known universal hash function family. We introduce a variant of MMH[Formula: see text], that we call GRDH, where we use an arbitrary integer [Formula: see text] instead of prime [Formula: see text] and let the keys [Formula: see text] satisfy the conditions [Formula: see text] ([Formula: see text]), where [Formula: see text] are given positive divisors of [Formula: see text]. Then via connecting the universal hashing problem to the number of solutions of restricted linear congruences, we prove that the family GRDH is an [Formula: see text]-almost-[Formula: see text]-universal family of hash functions for some [Formula: see text] if and only if [Formula: see text] is odd and [Formula: see text] [Formula: see text]. Furthermore, if these conditions are satisfied then GRDH is [Formula: see text]-almost-[Formula: see text]-universal, where [Formula: see text] is the smallest prime divisor of [Formula: see text]. Finally, as an application of our results, we propose an authentication code with secrecy scheme which strongly generalizes the scheme studied by Alomair et al. [J. Math. Cryptol. 4 (2010) 121–148], and [J.UCS 15 (2009) 2937–2956].

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 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 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 score0.598
Threshold uncertainty score0.333

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Foundations of Computer ScienceSame topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207