A Ring Oscillator-Based PUF With Enhanced Challenge-Response Pairs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical unclonable functions (PUFs) are powerful security primitives that provide cheap and secure solutions for security-related applications. Strong PUFs provide a large set of challenge-response pairs (CRPs) and are suitable for device authentication. Weak PUFs produce a small number of CRPs and can be used for key extraction. In this paper, we propose a novel method to enhance the CRP set of traditional ring oscillator-based PUFs (RO-PUFs). RO-PUFs are one of the most reliable types of PUFs and the best fit to implement on the field-programmable gate arrays. To the best of our knowledge, our method provides the maximum number of CRPs compared with the state of the art. In addition, the number of response bits that can be extracted by our method for each challenge is n-1 times more than the state of the art, where n is the number of ROs. The large number of response bits results in the authentication of more devices and generation of more keys. Evaluation of the PUF responses produced by applying our method shows a significant improvement in unpredictability and randomness compared with the related works. Moreover, we show that the responses are unique and reliable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".