MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3008825431 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2020.2974839

Lightweight Dynamic Group Rekeying for Low-Power Wireless Networks in IIoT

2020· article· en· W3008825431 on OpenAlexafffund
Elena Uchiteleva, Ahmed Refaey, Abdallah Shami

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceRekeyingComputer networkOverhead (engineering)Transmission (telecommunications)EncryptionKey managementTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, a novel pseudorandom key chaining (PRKC) algorithm is introduced and evaluated. This lightweight symmetric scheme enables a transmission-triggered time variation of group keys in low-power wireless networks during broadcasting or multicasting. The proposed algorithm uses pseudorandom (PR) sequences, generated at the physical (PHY) layer of radio transceivers during a communication session, to symmetrically refresh the encryption keys on both sides of a communication link. This solution is scalable and suitable for large networks of nodes with limited resources in an Industrial Internet-of-Things (IIoT) environment. The strength of generated keys was tested with the use of the National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 800-22 (NIST SP 800-22) statistical suit. No binary patterns that may indicate a vulnerability were detected. The randomness of generated key sequences was further analyzed with the use of strange attractors approach which demonstrated that these sequences are robust against attacks, such as spoofing or intelligent brute forcing. To assess the real-time delay and computational overhead of the algorithm, it was implemented on a Raspberry Pi board. The results demonstrated that the PRKC algorithm runs over 60% faster and requires over 40% less CPU effort per round than the conventional hashing-based schemes. In addition, it does not require any communication overhead and transmission energy.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicChaos-based Image/Signal EncryptionFrench-language works237,207