MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055722212

Digital Signcryption

2006· dissertation· en· W7055722212 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSuperconducting Materials and Applications
Canadian institutionsBlackberry (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSigncryptionEncryptionDigital signatureMathematical proofCryptographyConfidentialityCryptographic primitiveSignature (topology)Cryptographic protocol
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Signcryption is a new cryptographic primitive which simultaneously provides both confidentiality and authenticity. Previously, these two goals had been considered separately, with encryption schemes providing confidentiality and signature schemes providing authenticity. In cases where both were required, the encryption and signature operations were simply sequentially composed. In 1997, Zheng demonstrated that by combining both goals into a single primitive, it is possible to achieve significant savings both in computational and communication overhead. Since then, a wide variety of signcryption schemes have been proposed. \nIn this thesis, we present a number of the proposed signcryption schemes in terms of a common framework. For the most part, the material has been previously presented in various research papers, but some previously omitted proofs have been filled in here. We begin by giving a formal definition of the signcryption primitive, complete with a security model. Then we look at some of the various proposed signcryption schemes, and consider their relative advantages and disadvantages. Finally, we look ahead at what future progress might be made in the field.

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)0.004
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.166 · 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

Citations5
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicSuperconducting Materials and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207