Importance of chaos theory
in [Cryptography]
|
Prev: Primitive tri/pentanomials
Next: solutions manual
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 30 Jul 2010 15:19 unruh wrote: > If they want to be noticed by the crypto community they should get off > their buts and find the journals that the crypt people read. Noone has > the time to read every journal in the world. Publishing your latest > theory on quantum gravity in the journal of Molecular Biology, no matter > how reputeable, will have zero impact. I suppose that, as the science of crypto advances and branches off into more and more substantially independent subfields , the matter will become quite complicated with time. Several decades ago, the presumably single major journal of crypto was Cryptologia. But now different journals with names containing 'crypto' or not may treat subjects that are fairly relevant to crypto, if I don't err. Consider, say, quantum computing/crypto. Couldn't an author (particularly one from physics or math) with some justification consider that some of his works belong to physics or math and hence have these published in the corresponding journals? Or consider coding theory and finite fields. I think that an akin situation exists there too. In fact, the volume of scientific publication grows with such a speed that I guess in a couple of decades it would be very very difficult to find good literatures that one needs, much like today one sometimes have big difficulties with Google searches that turn up thousands of items. M. K. Shen
From: Tom St Denis on 30 Jul 2010 16:01 On Jul 30, 3:19 pm, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.s...(a)t-online.de> wrote: > unruh wrote: > > If they want to be noticed by the crypto community they should get off > > their buts and find the journals that the crypt people read. Noone has > > the time to read every journal in the world. Publishing your latest > > theory on quantum gravity in the journal of Molecular Biology, no matter > > how reputeable, will have zero impact. > > I suppose that, as the science of crypto advances and branches off into > more and more substantially independent subfields , the matter will > become quite complicated with time. Several decades ago, the presumably > single major journal of crypto was Cryptologia. But now different > journals with names containing 'crypto' or not may treat subjects that CRYPTO was started circa 82-84 somewhere in there, it's nearly as old as I am. FSE and CHES popped up in the 90s. SAC around 2000 [iirc]. You really, really, really, really, really, need to do some research. There isn't a journal of chaotic crypto because there isn't enough fruitful research in that field. Like I said in my reply earlier any chaotic system would likely fall in the venue of CRYPTO but could fall into FSE/CHES if optimization were the name of the game. Tom
From: unruh on 30 Jul 2010 16:02 On 2010-07-30, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)t-online.de> wrote: > unruh wrote: > >> If they want to be noticed by the crypto community they should get off >> their buts and find the journals that the crypt people read. Noone has >> the time to read every journal in the world. Publishing your latest >> theory on quantum gravity in the journal of Molecular Biology, no matter >> how reputeable, will have zero impact. > > I suppose that, as the science of crypto advances and branches off into > more and more substantially independent subfields , the matter will > become quite complicated with time. Several decades ago, the presumably > single major journal of crypto was Cryptologia. But now different > journals with names containing 'crypto' or not may treat subjects that > are fairly relevant to crypto, if I don't err. Consider, say, quantum > computing/crypto. Couldn't an author (particularly one from physics or > math) with some justification consider that some of his works belong > to physics or math and hence have these published in the corresponding > journals? Or consider coding theory and finite fields. I think that an > akin situation exists there too. In fact, the volume of scientific > publication grows with such a speed that I guess in a couple of decades > it would be very very difficult to find good literatures that one > needs, much like today one sometimes have big difficulties with Google > searches that turn up thousands of items. You asked-- how can the author get his paper read. My answer is still-- publish in journals that the intended audience reads. I will not change that advice. But then you original question was about chaos theory and crypto. You seemed to have the thing that if the paper was published in a reputable journal, it must be a good and important paper. That is simply false. Whether or not this particular paper is either good or important I do not know, but if the author, or you , want the work to be noticed by cryptographers, publish it in journals that cryptographers read. In your example, if the physicist published it in a physics journal, he should not be surprized if molecular biologists do not notice it. > > M. K. Shen >
From: Mok-Kong Shen on 30 Jul 2010 16:48 unruh wrote: > You asked-- how can the author get his paper read. My answer is still-- > publish in journals that the intended audience reads. > I will not change that advice. > > But then you original question was about chaos theory and crypto. You > seemed to have the thing that if the paper was published in a reputable > journal, it must be a good and important paper. That is simply false. > Whether or not this particular paper is either good or important I do > not know, but if the author, or you , want the work to be noticed by > cryptographers, publish it in journals that cryptographers read. > In your example, if the physicist published it in a physics journal, he > should not be surprized if molecular biologists do not notice it. O.k. Which journal would you e.g. suggest that the authors of the paper I cited should submit to? My point is essentially that the field of crpyto is nowadays very large such that the set of cypto people is also very large and difficult to be precisely defined and that, because of the overlapping of different disciplines, it may be difficult to determine which is the (single) field that a work pertains. And even after a field is chosen, there are a large number of journals with different characters that may be all appropriate but one paper can certainly only be published in one single journal only. Hypothetically consider a paper on factorization of numbers. Because of RSA etc. it would be of interest to crypto. But it is (actually more properly) also number theory. So while perhaps a couple of crypto journals may accept the paper, the Journal of Number Theory certainly may as well. But how about Annals of Mathematics or Journal of Mathematics of the Osaka University? I mean that there is a "diversity" of journals that can be "approprite" for the author to submit to but some would very likely escape the attention of the "crypto" readers (in a very limited sense that one would arbitrarily "define"). Of course, if an author makes a certain choice and that entails his missing certain potential readers, that is his own business or fault. But on the other hand, it could perhaps also be asked whether some interested scientists may not occassionally take some bit of time to look a little bit further beyond his limited "confines" and that in their own interest and also in the interest of advancement of sciences as a whole. M. K. Shen
From: unruh on 30 Jul 2010 19:18
On 2010-07-30, Mok-Kong Shen <mok-kong.shen(a)t-online.de> wrote: > unruh wrote: > >> You asked-- how can the author get his paper read. My answer is still-- >> publish in journals that the intended audience reads. >> I will not change that advice. >> >> But then you original question was about chaos theory and crypto. You >> seemed to have the thing that if the paper was published in a reputable >> journal, it must be a good and important paper. That is simply false. >> Whether or not this particular paper is either good or important I do >> not know, but if the author, or you , want the work to be noticed by >> cryptographers, publish it in journals that cryptographers read. >> In your example, if the physicist published it in a physics journal, he >> should not be surprized if molecular biologists do not notice it. > > O.k. Which journal would you e.g. suggest that the authors of the paper > I cited should submit to? My point is essentially that the field of Are you the author? You told us they has already published their paper. Do you have any pull with them? > crpyto is nowadays very large such that the set of cypto people is also > very large and difficult to be precisely defined and that, because of > the overlapping of different disciplines, it may be difficult to > determine which is the (single) field that a work pertains. And even > after a field is chosen, there are a large number of journals with > different characters that may be all appropriate but one paper can > certainly only be published in one single journal only. Hypothetically > consider a paper on factorization of numbers. Because of RSA etc. it > would be of interest to crypto. But it is (actually more properly) also > number theory. So while perhaps a couple of crypto journals may accept > the paper, the Journal of Number Theory certainly may as well. But how > about Annals of Mathematics or Journal of Mathematics of the Osaka > University? I mean that there is a "diversity" of journals that can be > "approprite" for the author to submit to but some would very likely > escape the attention of the "crypto" readers (in a very limited sense > that one would arbitrarily "define"). Of course, if an author makes a > certain choice and that entails his missing certain potential readers, > that is his own business or fault. But on the other hand, it could > perhaps also be asked whether some interested scientists may not > occassionally take some bit of time to look a little bit further beyond > his limited "confines" and that in their own interest and also in the > interest of advancement of sciences as a whole. Your questions are silly. The best journal depends on far too much to be able to give an blanket recommendation. The authors have not asked me anyway, and I have no interest in reading their paper, nor the expertise to make a suggestion. Tom has made some. > > M. K. Shen > |