MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2427518429

Interpretation functions-based method to verify secrecy under equational theories

2008· article· en· W2427518429 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

VenueInternational Conference on Telecommunications · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSecurity and Verification in Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecrecyInterpretation (philosophy)Property (philosophy)Cryptographic protocolComputer scienceCryptographyConstruct (python library)Cryptographic primitiveAbstract interpretationProtocol (science)Theoretical computer scienceFunction (biology)Computer securityProgramming languageEpistemology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper gives a novel approach to verify the secrecy property of cryptographic protocols under equational theories. Indeed, by using the notion of interpretation functions, this paper presents some sufficient and practical conditions allowing to guarantee the secrecy property of cryptographic protocols under any equational theory. An interpretation function is a safe means by which an agent can estimate the security level of message components that he receives so that he can handle them correctly. Also, this paper gives a guideline on how to construct an interpretation together with an example and how to use it to analyse a cryptographic protocol.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.785
Threshold uncertainty score0.824

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.266 · 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