MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031524031

Distance Lower Bounding.

2014· preprint· en· W3031524031 on OpenAlexaff
Xifan Zheng, Reihaneh Safavi–Naini, Hadi Ahmadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIACR Cryptology ePrint Archive · 2014
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRFID technology advancements
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBounding overwatchGas meter proverCollusionComputer scienceImpossibilityProtocol (science)Upper and lower boundsComputer securityTheoretical computer scienceAuthentication (law)Cryptographic protocolCryptographyMathematicsLawMathematical proof
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Distance (upper)-bounding (DUB) allows a verifier to know whether a proving party is located within a certain distance bound. DUB protocols have many applications in secure authentication and location based services. We consider the dual problem of distance lower bound-ing (DLB), where the prover proves it is outside a distance bound to the verifier. We motivate this problem through a number of application scenarios, and model security against distance fraud (DF), Man-in-the-Middle (MiM), and collusion fraud (CF) attacks. We prove impossibility of security against these attacks without making physical assumptions. We propose approaches to the construction of secure protocols under reasonable assumptions, and give detailed design of our DLB protocol and prove its security using the above model. This is the first treatment of the DLB problem in the untrusted prover setting, with a number of applications and raising new research questions. We discuss our results and propose directions for future research. 1

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.632
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIACR Cryptology ePrint ArchiveSame topicRFID technology advancementsFrench-language works237,207