MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307812414 · doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxac132

The Need for Being Explicit: Failed Attempts to Construct Implicit Certificates from Lattices

2022· article· en· W4307812414 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Computer Journal · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceCertificateComputer securityConstruct (python library)Public-key cryptographyNISTCryptographic primitiveCryptanalysisCryptographyEmulationEncryptionTheoretical computer scienceComputer networkCryptographic protocol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Global efforts such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)’s post-quantum standardization center on cryptographic primitives like public-key encryption and signature schemes that are secure even in the presence of quantum adversaries. In addition, one must also consider efficient certificate management as new technologies like the Internet of Things and 5G wireless networks rely on them. For example, the IEEE Standard for vehicle-to-vehicle communication depends on implicit certificates. However, the only efficient construction available is over elliptic curves, and hence not quantum-secure. This paper investigates approaches to construct implicit certificate schemes from lattices, employing the NIST Round 3 signature schemes Dilithium and Falcon. We consider emulation of the existing implicit certificate scheme and proceed to more innovative techniques like combining the two schemes or pairing them with encryption. Unfortunately, we encounter problems with each design, due to recurring causes like conflicting secret key and signature sizes, unique sampler requirements and the rigidity of the parameter sets. By explaining each of these issues, this paper will hopefully spark ideas for more successful constructions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.765
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.233 · 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