MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Decrypting Caesar Ciphers using Machine Learning Regression: An exploratory analysis

2025· preprint· en· W4406140020 on OpenAlexaff
Arya Vivekanand Prabhu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicChaos-based Image/Signal Encryption
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExploratory analysisComputer scienceMachine learningArtificial intelligenceRegressionRegression analysisStatisticsData scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Caesar cipher is one of the most basic cryptographic methods that was invented by Julius Caesar himself. This encryption method was used by him to safely communicate with soldiers. While simple, analysis and techniques to crack the cipher have been questions people have pondering since the time of the emperor. One such technique is letter frequency analysis, which uses the distribution of letters in English text to make predictions. In this paper, we will be exploring how letter frequency and machine learning regression models can be used to crack the Caesar cipher. We will be analyzing the performance of several models, optimize the best ones and create our final key guessing models. Our end result are multiple regression models that reliably predict the key of a Caesar cipher.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.269 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicChaos-based Image/Signal EncryptionFrench-language works237,207