MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274097581 · doi:10.5755/j02.eie.10862

A Initiation Protocol for Crypto Graphical Session

2004· article· en· W2274097581 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

VenueElektronika ir Elektrotechnika · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Authentication Protocols Security
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)Computer scienceAdversaryProtocol (science)Third partyComputer securityLithuanianCryptographyTrusted third partyCryptographic protocolWorld Wide WebInternet privacy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the analysis of using cryptographic methods for sensitive information interchanging. It is proposed the initiationprotocol for crypto graphical session that security is based on certain demands: the channel must exist, which is additional and save, thefunctioning of trusted third party must be and adversary can’t interfere between subjects interact and the third, i.e. trusted party. Thecryptography primitives are proposed, that allow realizing the second and third phases of initiation protocol. Besides, the analysis ofsecond and third protocol phases and prevention of cracking is done. That permits motivated involving of these phases on to initiationprotocol. Ill. 2, bibl. 5 (in Lithuanian; summaries in Lithuanian, English and Russian).

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.314 · 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