MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4252502822 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-205624/v1

Optical Coherence Encryption with Structured Random Light

2021· preprint· en· W4252502822 on OpenAlexaff
Demin Peng, Zhaofeng Huang, Yonglei Liu, Yahong Chen, Fei Wang, Sergey A. Ponomarenko, Yangjian Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEncryptionComputer scienceFourier transformCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Theoretical computer scienceOpticsPhysicsMathematicsComputer networkStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Information encryption with optical technologies has become increasingly important due to remarkable multidimensional capabilities of light fields. However, the optical encryption protocols proposed to date have been primarily based on the first-order field characteristics, such as the optical field amplitude and phase as well as its polarization. As the said first-order characteristics of light fields are strongly affected by interference effects, the conventional encoding protocols become quite unstable during light propagation and interaction with the matter. Here, we introduce an alternative optical encryption protocol whereby the information is encoded into the spatial coherence distribution of a structured random light beam via a generalized van Cittert--Zernike theorem. We show that the proposed approach has two key advantages over its conventional counterparts. First, the complexity of measuring the spatial coherence distribution of light enhances the encryption protocol security. Second, the relative insensitivity of the second-order statistical characteristics of light to environmental noise makes the protocol robust against the environmental fluctuations, e.g, the atmospheric turbulence. We carry out experiments to demonstrate the feasibility of the coherence-based encryption method with the aid of a fractional Fourier transform. Our results open up a promising avenue for further research into optical encryption in complex environments.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.288 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch SquareSame topicOptical Polarization and EllipsometryFrench-language works237,207