2009
DOI: 10.1142/s0219876209001814
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of Multi-Exponentiation Algorithm Using Binary Signed-Digit Representations

Abstract: We concentrate our attention on the computational efficiency analysis of the multiexponentiation algorithm using Yang et al.'s BSD representation, which is the generalization of Dimitrov et al.'s BSD representation. Our theoretical results are that the average number of multiplications is at least 1.527n by Yang et al.'s BSD representation and 1.537n by Dimitrov et al.'s BSD representation, where n is the bit-length of the exponents.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Whereas the binary representation for an integer is unique, the signed binary representation by −1, 1, and 0 is not. Since the cost of computing the inverse of a point is negligible compared to the point addition over the elliptic curve group, the improved multi-scalar multiplication algorithms, detailed in [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17], require only one extra register to store the value A -B in Step 1 of Algorithm Shamir's trick in Figure 1. The NAF representation [18,19] is optimal for one integer.…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas the binary representation for an integer is unique, the signed binary representation by −1, 1, and 0 is not. Since the cost of computing the inverse of a point is negligible compared to the point addition over the elliptic curve group, the improved multi-scalar multiplication algorithms, detailed in [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17], require only one extra register to store the value A -B in Step 1 of Algorithm Shamir's trick in Figure 1. The NAF representation [18,19] is optimal for one integer.…”
Section: Previous Workmentioning
confidence: 99%