MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111234133 · doi:10.18280/ijsse.100510

Image Encryption Based on Matrix Factorization

2020· article· en· W3111234133 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Safety and Security Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncryptionMatrix decompositionScramblingNon-negative matrix factorizationAlgorithmComputer scienceCryptographyMatrix (chemical analysis)FactorizationImage (mathematics)Key (lock)Theoretical computer scienceDecompositionMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a matrix decomposition-based approach for image cryptography. The proposed method consists of decomposing the image into different component and scrambling the components to form the image encryption technique. We use two different type of matrix decomposition techniques to check the efficiency of proposed encryption method. The decomposition techniques used are Independent component analysis (ICA) and Non-Negative Matrix factorization (NMF). The proposed technique has unique user defined parameters (key) such as decomposition method, number of decomposition components and order in which the components are arranged. The unique encryption technique is designed on the basis of these key parameters. The original image can be reconstructed at the decryption end only if the selected parameters are known to the user. The design examples for both decomposition approaches are presented for illustration purpose. We analyze the complexity and encryption time of cryptography system. Results prove that the proposed scheme is more secure as it has less correlation between the input image and the encrypted version of the same as compared to state-of-art methods. The computation time of the proposed approach is found to be comparable.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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