MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Second-Order Asymptotics for One-way Secret Key Agreement

2021· article· en· W3198805658 on OpenAlexafffund
Alireza Poostindouz, Reihaneh Safavi–Naini

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Communication Security Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAlice and BobKey (lock)Alice (programming language)Computer sciencePublic-key cryptographyCryptographyOne-way functionShared secretTheoretical computer scienceConstruct (python library)Protocol (science)Order (exchange)Key-agreement protocolKey exchangeKey distributionDiscrete mathematicsComputer securityComputer networkMathematicsEncryption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Secret key agreement (SKA) is a basic cryptographic primitive that establishes a shared secret key between parties. In the two-party source model of SKA, Alice and Bob want to share a secret key. They each have private samples of two correlated variables that are partially leaked to Eve. In a one-way SKA protocol, Alice sends a single message to Bob over a public channel, allowing the two parties to calculate a shared secret key that will be essentially unknown to Eve. The length of the key is a function of the number of samples$n$. In this paper, we prove a tight second-order asymptotic approximation of the key length of one-way SKA protocols, and propose an approach to construct a computationally efficient one-way SKA protocol with near-optimum finite key length. We compare our results with related work, and discuss future research directions.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.082
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.082
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.015
Open science0.0040.006
Research integrity0.0030.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWireless Communication Security TechniquesFrench-language works237,207