MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413472242 · doi:10.1109/jiot.2025.3601984

A Novel and Robust Authentication Protocol for Secure Underwater Communication Systems

2025· article· en· W4413472242 on OpenAlexaff
Ch. Rupa, Thippa Reddy Gadekallu, Gautam Srivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Internet of Things Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsBrandon University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceAuthentication protocolComputer networkProtocol (science)Computer securityAuthentication (law)Cryptographic protocolDistributed computingCryptography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater communication systems are vital for applications such as environmental monitoring, military surveillance, and offshore exploration. However, existing authentication protocols for underwater networks are often inefficient, vulnerable to replay and impersonation attacks, and lack resilience to node failures, a gap not fully addressed by current standards. The proposed study presents the design and implementation of a novel authentication protocol tailored for underwater communication systems. The approach leverages pentatope elliptic curve cryptography for efficient key generation and secure data exchange, ensuring robust protection against common cyber threats. Formal security analysis using BAN logic and the Scyther tool verifies resistance to replay, impersonation, and eavesdropping attacks, with no successful attacks detected in over 60 test cases. The resulting design demonstrates significant improvements in computational efficiency and resilience to adversarial attacks, ensuring scalable and reliable underwater communications. Thus, it represents a critical advancement in securing underwater networks, paving the way for practical deployment in mission-critical applications. The proposed protocol reduces total communication overhead to 2,112 bits (a 30–34% reduction) and lowers computational cost to 0.4 ms per entity, significantly improving efficiency compared to existing schemes. Furthermore, the protocol incorporates fallback authentication peers to ensure resilience under partial node outages.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Internet of Things JournalSame topicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207