MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3104885263 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1710.07765

On the Derivative Imbalance and Ambiguity of Functions

2017· article· en· W3104885263 on OpenAlexafffund
Shihui Fu, Xiutao Feng, Qiang Wang, Claude Carlet

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCoding theory and cryptography
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsAbelian groupMathematicsAmbiguityUpper and lower boundsMultiplicative functionNonlinear systemInverseDiscrete mathematicsMeasure (data warehouse)CombinatoricsApplied mathematicsPure mathematicsMathematical analysisComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2007, Carlet and Ding introduced two parameters, denoted by $Nb_F$ and\n$NB_F$, quantifying respectively the balancedness of general functions $F$\nbetween finite Abelian groups and the (global) balancedness of their\nderivatives $D_a F(x)=F(x+a)-F(x)$, $a\\in G\\setminus\\{0\\}$ (providing an\nindicator of the nonlinearity of the functions). These authors studied the\nproperties and cryptographic significance of these two measures. They provided\nfor S-boxes inequalities relating the nonlinearity $\\mathcal{NL}(F)$ to $NB_F$,\nand obtained in particular an upper bound on the nonlinearity which unifies\nSidelnikov-Chabaud-Vaudenay's bound and the covering radius bound. At the\nWorkshop WCC 2009 and in its postproceedings in 2011, a further study of these\nparameters was made; in particular, the first parameter was applied to the\nfunctions $F+L$ where $L$ is affine, providing more nonlinearity parameters.\n In 2010, motivated by the study of Costas arrays, two parameters called\nambiguity and deficiency were introduced by Panario \\emph{et al.} for\npermutations over finite Abelian groups to measure the injectivity and\nsurjectivity of the derivatives respectively. These authors also studied some\nfundamental properties and cryptographic significance of these two measures.\nFurther studies followed without that the second pair of parameters be compared\nto the first one.\n In the present paper, we observe that ambiguity is the same parameter as\n$NB_F$, up to additive and multiplicative constants (i.e. up to rescaling). We\nmake the necessary work of comparison and unification of the results on $NB_F$,\nrespectively on ambiguity, which have been obtained in the five papers devoted\nto these parameters. We generalize some known results to any Abelian groups and\nwe more importantly derive many new results on these parameters.\n

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.278
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.111 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations6
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)Same topicCoding theory and cryptographyFrench-language works237,207