MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950802487

Efficient Techniques for High-Speed Elliptic Curve Cryptography.

2010· preprint· en· W2950802487 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Longa, Catherine H. Gebotys

Bibliographic record

VenueIACR Cryptology ePrint Archive · 2010
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpeedupElliptic curve point multiplicationCurve25519Scalar multiplicationElliptic Curve Digital Signature AlgorithmComputer scienceHyperelliptic curve cryptographyElliptic curve cryptographyElliptic curveTripling-oriented Doche–Icart–Kohel curveParallel computingJacobian matrix and determinantx86Hessian form of an elliptic curveCryptographyArithmeticAlgorithmMathematicsPublic-key cryptographyApplied mathematicsEncryptionSoftwareProgramming languageMathematical analysisOperating system
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. In this paper, a thorough bottom-up optimization process (field, point and scalar arithmetic) is used to speed up the computation of elliptic curve point multiplication and report new speed records on modern x86-64 based processors. Our different implementations include elliptic curves using Jacobian coordinates, extended Twisted Edwards coordinates and the recently proposed Galbraith-Lin-Scott (GLS) method. Compared to state-of-the-art implementations on identical platforms the proposed techniques provide up to 30 % speed improvements. Additionally, compared to the best previous published results on similar platforms improvements up to 31 % are observed. This research is crucial for advancing high speed cryptography on new emerging processor architectures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.006

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIACR Cryptology ePrint ArchiveSame topicCryptography and Residue ArithmeticFrench-language works237,207