MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409795135 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-402

Application of Generative Adversarial Networks’ Image Information Security Encryption Algorithm in the Behavior Management of Prison Inmates

2025· article· en· W4409795135 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedical Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdversarial systemEncryptionPrisonImage (mathematics)Generative grammarComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceComputer securityAlgorithmTheoretical computer sciencePsychologyCriminology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the global informationization boom, information security has become a problem for all of us.In order to be able to effectively detect the physical health status of criminals in prison and ensure the data security of the process, an image encryption method is designed to effectively protect the monitoring information.The process is based on generative adversarial network with generator and discriminator for image generation and data discrimination processing respectively, and optimizes the feature transmission process of image with the help of residual network.The key is generated by chaotic sequence method during the image transmission process.The encrypted image is transmitted to the staff port and the destination image is obtained after the decryption process of data key.The results of the study indicated that the decryption accuracy of the GAN algorithm in the dataset test increases gradually with the iteration process.The accuracy of the image after the completion of the iteration reached 98.69%, indicating that the algorithm has a good restoration effect for recovering the image after transmission.The structural similarity of the data image after the GAN algorithm processing decryption can reach 0.988.The peak signal-to-noise ratio index of the image was 37.78dB, which indicates that the clarity of the image after encrypted transmission is high.The research method can provide an effective theoretical support for the encrypted transmission of video 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.302
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicMedical Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207