MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390692183 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2024.3351988

STBCIoT: Securing the Transmission of Biometric Images in Customer IoT

2024· article· en· W4390692183 on OpenAlexaff
Denghui Zhang, Muhammad Shafiq, Gautam Srivastava, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu, Le Wang, Zhaoquan Gu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking Techniques
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsComputer scienceEncryptionLossy compressionBiometricsCryptographyKey (lock)Computer engineeringArtificial intelligenceComputer networkComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent advancement of the Internet of Things (IoT) and information technology has led to the rapid expansion of interconnectivity among a billion devices across various applications. The advent of massive data has resulted in greater computational dependence, posing obstacles to applying security policies in energy-sensitive devices. However, public-key-based encryption algorithms are impractical or impossible to execute on these resource-limited terminals. In this paper, we propose a lightweight framework called STBCIoT based on a visual cryptography (VC) scheme to achieve low-latency encryption for large-scale data like biometric images. To reduce noise in encryption, we utilize central recognition and gray-level features of QR codes to integrate the visually friendly feature of QR into VC. we further propose a high-quality image generation model with the halftoning effect of VC to improve the quality of decrypted images. The experimental results demonstrate that our proposed method achieves high recognition performance on lossy decrypted images, effectively overcoming the performance limitations of traditional public key encryption methods for largescale images.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.811
Threshold uncertainty score0.275

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations17
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicAdvanced Steganography and Watermarking TechniquesFrench-language works237,207