Generalized Jacobians in cryptography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Groups where the discrete logarithm problem (DLP) is believed to be intractable have proved to be inestimable building blocks for cryptographic applications. They are at the heart of numerous protocols such as key agreements, public-key cryptosystems, digital signatures, identification schemes, publicly verifiable secret sharings, hash functions and bit commitments. The search for new groups with intractable DLP is therefore of great importance. The study of such a candidate, the so-called generalized Jacobians, is the object of this dissertation. The motivation for this work came from the observation that several practical discrete logarithm-based cryptosystems, such as ElGamal, the Elliptic and Hyperelliptic Curve Cryptosystems, XTR, the Lucas-based cryptosystem LUC as well as the torus-based cryptosystem CEILIDH can all naturally be reinterpreted in terms of generalized Jacobians. We next provide, from a cryptographic point of view, a global description of this family of algebraic groups that highlights their potential for applications. Our main contribution is then to introduce a new public-key cryptosystem based on the simplest non-trivial generalized Jacobian of an elliptic curve. This work thus provides the first concrete example of a semi-abelian variety suitable for DL-based cryptography.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".