MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Java Benchmark Performance of Homomorphic Polynomial Public Key Cryptography for Key Encapsulation and Digital Signature

2024· article· en· W4402264487 on OpenAlexaff
Randy Kuang, Michael Kuang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptographic Implementations and Security
Canadian institutionsQuantropi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHomomorphic encryptionComputer sciencePublic-key cryptographyDigital signatureKey encapsulationEncapsulation (networking)CryptographyJavaKey (lock)Theoretical computer scienceComputer securityEncryptionOperating systemSymmetric-key algorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a comprehensive benchmarking analysis of Homomorphic Polynomial Public Key (HPPK) cryptography, focusing on its Key Encapsulation Mechanism (KEM) and Digital Signature (DS) implementations in Java. Leveraging high-level language implementations, we showcase the outstanding performance of HPPK, demonstrating clock cycles approximately doubled in comparison to its C counterparts. This significant achievement positions HPPK as a versatile and high-performance cryptographic solution, paving the way for extensive applications across various domains. Our study builds upon earlier benchmarking endeavors in C, where Kuang et al. reported exceptional results using the Supercop Toolkit. By transitioning to Java, a high-level language, we highlight the adaptability and efficiency of HPPK, making it accessible for a broader range of applications. The observed doubling of clock cycles in Java implementations underscores the remarkable performance achievable with high-level languages, reinforcing HPPK's standing as a robust and efficient post-quantum cryptographic solution. Through meticulous examination and comparison of key cryptographic operations, including key generation, encapsulation, decapsulation, signing, and verification, our paper provides valuable insights into the practical viability of HPPK in Java. The implications extend to diverse applications such as blockchain, digital currency, and Internet of Things (IoT) devices, where HPPK's superior performance can be harnessed effectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryptographic Implementations and SecurityFrench-language works237,207