MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multivariate Polynomial Public Key Digital Signature Algorithm: Semi-covariance Analysis and Performance Test over 5G Networks

2023· article· en· W4385269624 on OpenAlexafffund
Atinderpal Singh Lakhan, Mohammed Abuibaid, Jun Steed Huang, Mostafa Taha, Zhehan Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersMcGill UniversityCarleton University
KeywordsComputer scienceRobustness (evolution)AlgorithmCovarianceDigital signaturePost-quantum cryptographyCryptographyPublic-key cryptographyDigital Signature AlgorithmKey (lock)NISTEncryptionMultivariate statisticsTheoretical computer scienceMathematicsStatisticsMachine learningHash functionComputer networkComputer securitySpeech recognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arrival of quantum computers is imminent, with no room for uncertainty. It is only a matter of a few years before classical encryption algorithms face significant risks. NIST is leading the world to devise and standardize Post Quantum Cryptography (PQC) algorithms. In this study, we considered the Multivariate Polynomial Public Key (MPPK) Digital Signature (DS) algorithm as one of recent PQC algorithms and generated MPPK/DS key pairs with the true random number from the quantum computer. For each key pair, we calculated the semi-covariance correlation to measure its robustness against brute force attacks. The results show that, in average with the selected seed prime, MPPK has lower semi-covariance and thereby stronger robustness over traditional RSA and SPHINCS algorithms. Additionally, we measured the latency performance of MPPK/DS algorithm over 5G, WiFi, and local area networks, in comparison of RSA and SPHINCS algorithms. Finally, We made all developments available online for research community to carry out similar comparisons with other PQC algorithms.

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 categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.950
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207