Post-Quantum Two-party Adaptor Signature Based on Coding Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An adaptor signature can be viewed as a signature concealed with a secret value and, by design, any two of the trio yield the other. In a multiparty setting, an initial adaptor signature allows each party create additional adaptor signatures without the original secret. Adaptor signatures help address scalability and interoperabity issues in blockchain. They can also bring some important advantages to cryptocurrencies, such as low on-chain cost, improved transaction fungibility, and less limitations of a blockchain’s scripting language. In this paper, we propose a new two-party adaptor signature scheme that relies on quantum-safe hard problems in coding theory. The proposed scheme uses a hash-and-sign code-based signature scheme introduced by Debris-Alazard et al. and a code-based hard relation defined from the well-known syndrome decoding problem. To achieve all the basic properties of adaptor signatures formalized by Aumayr et al., we introduce further modifications to the aforementioned signature scheme. We also give a security analysis of our scheme and its application to the atomic swap. After providing a set of parameters for our scheme, we show that it has the smallest pre-signature size compared to existing post-quantum adaptor signatures.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".