MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297094909 · doi:10.1109/mcom.004.2200264

Lightweight Group Authentication for Decentralized Edge Collaboration

2022· article· en· W4297094909 on OpenAlexaff
He Fang, Xianbin Wang, Stefano Tomasin, Naofal Al‐Dhahir

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Magazine · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicUser Authentication and Security Systems
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSecurity tokenAuthentication (law)Computer networkEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionOverhead (engineering)Scheme (mathematics)Protocol (science)Authentication protocolMessage authentication codeComputer securityDistributed computingCryptographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to tedious interactions and intensive computations, existing group authentication methods suffer from long latency and high overhead for simultaneously identifying multiple devices associated with one common task. Considering the growing importance of decentralized edge collaboration, this article proposes a lightweight group authentication scheme by utilizing the collaboration process information. Specifically, the edge devices in the same task group generate tokens for authentication based on knowledge from previous rounds of learning-based collaboration. We develop both the random token generation and privacy-preserving token generation strategies for achieving quick authentication and security enhancement, respectively. The generated tokens are easy for the legitimate group members to verify but extremely difficult for attackers to predict. A group authentication protocol is proposed for edge devices to verify the others' identities based on their tokens simultaneously. The proposed scheme achieves lightweight authentication without extra security information in addition to generating and distributing any key (secret), resulting in both enhanced security and decreased cost. More importantly, the proposed scheme enhances security and provides continuous protections for the decentralized edge collaboration by utilizing its natural update of authentication knowledge before the next round of collaboration begins. Our simulation study considers an example of decentralized edge collaboration and verifies the proposed scheme.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.261 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Communications MagazineSame topicUser Authentication and Security SystemsFrench-language works237,207