MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312764393 · doi:10.1109/qce53715.2022.00067

Benchmark Performance of a New Quantum-Safe Multivariate Polynomial Digital Signature Algorithm

2022· article· en· W4312764393 on OpenAlexaff
Randy Kuang, Maria Perepechaenko, Ryan Toth, Michel Barbeau

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityQuantropi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic-key cryptographyComputer scienceDigital signatureNISTCryptosystemKey (lock)AlgorithmCryptographyTheoretical computer sciencePost-quantum cryptographyPolynomialEncryptionMathematicsHash functionComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kuang et al. introduced the new quantum-safe algorithm Multivariate Polynomial Public Key Digital Signature (MPPK DS). To create a signature, the MPPK DS scheme’s private key consists of univariate polynomials used as exponents of a secret randomly generated base. For signature verification, the verifier leverages public key multivariate polynomials and a modular arithmetic property. The verification procedure is probabilistic. The verifier uses noise variables and evaluates the public key polynomials. For a genuine signature, the verification procedure is successful for any evaluation of the public key polynomials. In this paper, we report the results of benchmarking MPPK DS on a 16-core Intel®Core™i7-10700 CPU system at 2.90 GHz using the SUPERCOP toolkit. SUPERCOP has been widely used to analyze the performance of post-quantum public-key encryption and key-establishment algorithms. We provide a side-by-side comparison of the NIST PQC third-round digital signature schemes with MPPK DS. With respect to the PQC schemes, the MPPK DS cryptosystem achieves small size public keys, private keys, and signatures. Moreover, compared with the NIST PQC digital signature algorithms, the performance of the MPPK DS algorithm is outstanding with fast procedures for key generation, signing, and verifying.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.853
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE)Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207