MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483991929 · doi:10.1109/chinacom.2011.6158154

FPGA implementation of two involutional block ciphers targeted to wireless sensor networks

2011· article· en· W2483991929 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceBlock cipherWireless sensor networkField-programmable gate arrayCryptographyEmbedded systemEncryptionCipherRC4Computer hardwareComputer networkAlgorithmStream cipher

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we investigate the energy cost of the FPGA implementation of two cryptographic algorithms targeted to wireless sensor networks (WSNs). Recent trends have seen the emergence of WSNs using sensor nodes based on reconfigurable hardware, such as a field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), thereby providing flexible functionality with higher performance than classical microcontroller based sensor nodes. In our study, we investigate the hardware implementation of involutional block ciphers since the characteristics of involution enables performing encryption and decryption using the same circuit. This characteristic is particularly appropriate for a wireless sensor node which requires the function of both encryption and decryption. Further, in order to consider the suitability of a cipher for application to a wireless sensor node, which is an energy constrained device, it is most critical to consider the cost of encryption in terms of energy consumption. Hence, we choose two involutional block ciphers, KHAZAD and BSPN, and analyze their energy efficiency for FPGA implementation.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.296
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