RCAE_BFV: Retrieve Encrypted Images using Convolution AutoEncoder and BFV
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) is an actual application in computer vision, which retrieves similar images from a database. Deep Learning (DL) is essential in many applications, including image retrieval applications. However, encryption techniques are used to protect data privacy because these data are vulnerable to being viewed by unauthorized parties while being transmitted over unsecured channels. This paper includes two parts for images retrieval. In the first part, features of all images of a Canadian Institute for Advanced Research CIFAR-10 dataset were extracted and stored on the Server-side. In the second part, the Brakerski/Fan-Vercauteren (BFV) homomorphic encryption scheme method for encrypting an image sent by the client-side. First, their decryption and image features are extracted depending on the trainer model when they arrive on the server-side. Then an extracted features are compared with stored features using the Cosine Distance method, and then the server encrypts the retrieved images and sends them to the client-side. Deep-learning results on plain images were 97% for classification and 96.7% for retriever images. At the same time, The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST ) test was used to check the security of BFV when applied to CIFAR-10 dataset. Index Terms— BFV, Convolution Autoencoder, Content-based image retrieval, Homomorphic encryption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".