MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378556424 · doi:10.1109/icjece.2023.3243888

High-Performance RNS Modular Exponentiation by Sum-Residue Reduction

2023· article· en· W4378556424 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tao Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Residue Arithmetic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular exponentiationExponentiationCryptographyResidue number systemPublic-key cryptographyModular arithmeticArithmeticComputer scienceMathematicsParallel computingAlgorithmEncryptionOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With rapid development and application of artificial intelligence and block chain, the requirement of information and data security is also increased, in which the public-key cryptography, such as Rivest-Shamir-Adleman (RSA) cryptography, plays a significant role. Modular exponentiation is fundamental in computer arithmetic and is widely applied in cryptography, such as ElGamal cryptography, Diffie–Hellman key exchange protocol, and RSA cryptography. The implementation of modular exponentiation in a residue number system leads to high parallelism in computation and has been applied in many hardware architectures. While most residue number system (RNS)-based architectures utilize RNS Montgomery algorithm with two residue number systems, the recent modular multiplication algorithm with sum residues performs modular reduction in only one residue number system with about the same parallelism. In this work, it is shown that the high-performance modular exponentiation and RSA cryptography can be implemented in RNS. Both the algorithm and architecture are improved to achieve high performance with extra area overheads, where a 1024-bit modular exponentiation can be completed in 0.567 ms in Xilinx XC6VLX195t-3 platform, costing 26 489 slices, 87 357 LUTs, 363 dedicated multipilers of <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$18$</tex-math> </inline-formula> <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\times $</tex-math> </inline-formula> <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$18$</tex-math> </inline-formula> bits, and 65 block RAMs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.352

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.155
Teacher spread0.151 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicCryptography and Residue ArithmeticFrench-language works237,207