MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W658016334 · doi:10.1049/iet-com.2015.0026

Joint channel coding‐cryptography based on random insertions and deletions in quasi‐cyclic‐low‐density parity check codes

2015· article· en· W658016334 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA and Biological Computing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLow-density parity-check codeCryptographyComputer scienceCoding (social sciences)Channel codeJoint (building)MathematicsAlgorithmTheoretical computer scienceDecoding methodsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a new secure channel coding scheme is presented which randomly inserts and deletes bits in a codeword of a quasi‐cyclic‐low‐density parity check (QC‐LDPC) code. It is shown that the key size is smaller than other code‐based cryptosystems based on permutation and scrambling matrices. The positions of the inserted and deleted bits are determined using a secret key. It is shown that the error performance of the resulting code after the insertions and deletions is better than a random low‐density parity check code with similar parameters. An important advantage of this cryptosystem is that even if the QC‐LDPC code is revealed, the system remains secure. Furthermore, the proposed approach using insertions and deletions can be employed with other classes of error correcting codes.

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.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.504
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.230 · 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