The Experts below are selected from a list of 2597244 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Bin-chang Chieu - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Shyi-Tsong Wu and Bin-Chang Chieu - A user friendly remote authentication with smart cards: A user friendly remote authentication scheme with smart cards
Computers & Security, 2003Co-Authors: Bin-chang ChieuAbstract:Based on a one-way function, Sun [6] has proposed an efficient remote authentication scheme using smart cards. The scheme is very elaborate since no password table is required to keep as well as low communication and low computation costs. However, the password of a user has to be computed by the system. This, in general, cannot satisfy user's requirements. To achieve the aim of user friendliness, we propose a modified version that inherits the advantages of Sun's scheme while still allowing the users to choose and change their passwords freely.
Goichiro Hanaoka - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Mycrypt - Towards User-Friendly Cryptography
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2017Co-Authors: Goichiro HanaokaAbstract:In this talk, we discuss User-Friendliness in cryptography and its importance. Especially, we reconsider the significance of generic constructions of cryptographic tools, using the case of proxy re-encryption as an example. We then suggest that enjoyable aspects of cryptographic tools may also be important for technology diffusion. We illustrate this using the case of card-based protocols as an example.
-
Towards User-Friendly Cryptography
Paradigms in Cryptology – Mycrypt 2016. Malicious and Exploratory Cryptology, 2017Co-Authors: Goichiro HanaokaAbstract:In this talk, we discuss User-Friendliness in cryptography and its importance. Especially, we reconsider the significance of generic constructions of cryptographic tools, using the case of proxy re-encryption as an example. We then suggest that enjoyable aspects of cryptographic tools may also be important for technology diffusion. We illustrate this using the case of card-based protocols as an example.
Hans H.c.m. Savelberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Which activity monitor to use? Validity, reproducibility and user friendliness of three activity monitors
BMC public health, 2014Co-Authors: Brenda A J Berendsen, Marike R. C. Hendriks, Kenneth Meijer, Guy Plasqui, Nicolaas C. Schaper, Hans H.c.m. SavelbergAbstract:Health is associated with amount of daily physical activity. Recently, the identification of sedentary time as an independent factor, has gained interest. A valid and easy to use activity monitor is needed to objectively investigate the relationship between physical activity, sedentary time and health. We compared validity and reproducibility of physical activity measurement and posture identification of three activity monitors, as well as user friendliness. Healthy volunteers wore three activity monitors simultaneously: ActivPAL3, ActiGraphGT3X and CAM. Data were acquired under both controlled (n = 5) and free-living conditions (n = 9). The controlled laboratory measurement, that included standardized walking intensity and posture allocation, was performed twice. User friendliness was evaluated with a questionnaire. Posture classification was compared with direct observation (controlled measurement) and with diaries (free living). Accelerometer intensity accuracy was tested by correlations with walking speed. User friendliness was compared between activity monitors. Reproducibility was at least substantial in all monitors. The difference between the two CAM measurements increased with walking intensity. Amount of correct posture classification by ActivPAL3 was 100.0% (kappa 0.98), 33.9% by ActiGraphGT3X (kappa 0.29) and 100.0% by CAM (kappa 0.99). Correlations between accelerometer intensity and walking speed were 0.98 for ActivPAL3, 1.00 for ActiGraphGT3X and 0.98 for CAM. ICCs between activity monitors and diary were 0.98 in ActivPAL3, 0.59 and 0.96 in ActiGraphGT3X and 0.98 in CAM. ActivPAL3 and ActiGraphGT3X had higher user friendliness scores than the CAM. The ActivPAL3 is valid, reproducible and user friendly. The posture classification by the ActiGraphGT3X is not valid, but reflection of walking intensity and user friendliness are good. The CAM is valid; however, reproducibility at higher walking intensity and user friendliness might cause problems. Further validity studies in free living are recommended.
Brenda A J Berendsen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Which activity monitor to use? Validity, reproducibility and user friendliness of three activity monitors
BMC public health, 2014Co-Authors: Brenda A J Berendsen, Marike R. C. Hendriks, Kenneth Meijer, Guy Plasqui, Nicolaas C. Schaper, Hans H.c.m. SavelbergAbstract:Health is associated with amount of daily physical activity. Recently, the identification of sedentary time as an independent factor, has gained interest. A valid and easy to use activity monitor is needed to objectively investigate the relationship between physical activity, sedentary time and health. We compared validity and reproducibility of physical activity measurement and posture identification of three activity monitors, as well as user friendliness. Healthy volunteers wore three activity monitors simultaneously: ActivPAL3, ActiGraphGT3X and CAM. Data were acquired under both controlled (n = 5) and free-living conditions (n = 9). The controlled laboratory measurement, that included standardized walking intensity and posture allocation, was performed twice. User friendliness was evaluated with a questionnaire. Posture classification was compared with direct observation (controlled measurement) and with diaries (free living). Accelerometer intensity accuracy was tested by correlations with walking speed. User friendliness was compared between activity monitors. Reproducibility was at least substantial in all monitors. The difference between the two CAM measurements increased with walking intensity. Amount of correct posture classification by ActivPAL3 was 100.0% (kappa 0.98), 33.9% by ActiGraphGT3X (kappa 0.29) and 100.0% by CAM (kappa 0.99). Correlations between accelerometer intensity and walking speed were 0.98 for ActivPAL3, 1.00 for ActiGraphGT3X and 0.98 for CAM. ICCs between activity monitors and diary were 0.98 in ActivPAL3, 0.59 and 0.96 in ActiGraphGT3X and 0.98 in CAM. ActivPAL3 and ActiGraphGT3X had higher user friendliness scores than the CAM. The ActivPAL3 is valid, reproducible and user friendly. The posture classification by the ActiGraphGT3X is not valid, but reflection of walking intensity and user friendliness are good. The CAM is valid; however, reproducibility at higher walking intensity and user friendliness might cause problems. Further validity studies in free living are recommended.
Felix Cornelius - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
AMAST - InterACT: An Interactive Theorem Prover for Algebraic Specifications
Algebraic Methodology and Software Technology, 1996Co-Authors: Robert Geisler, Marcus Klar, Felix CorneliusAbstract:The InterACT tool is a theorem prover for algebraic specifications with conditional equations emphasizing User-Friendliness and interaction. Its purpose is mainly educational, e.g. to support the teaching of formal methods. It already has been used successfully in universitary courses on formal specification of software systems. InterACT provides a graphical user interface that supports proving “by mouse”.
-
COMPASS/ADT - InterACT: An Interactive Theorem and Completeness Prover for Algebraic Specifications with Conditional Equation
Recent Trends in Data Type Specification, 1996Co-Authors: Marcus Klar, Robert Geisler, Felix CorneliusAbstract:The InterACT tool is an interactive theorem prover for algebraic specifications emphasizing User-Friendliness. InterACT is integrated in the existing ACT environment. The main purpose of InterACT is to teach formal methods in universitary courses about formal specification of software systems. It has already been used successfully in this area.
-
interact an interactive theorem and completeness prover for algebraic specifications with conditional equation
Workshop on Specification of Abstract Data Types Joint with COMPASS Workshop on Recent Trends in Data Type Specification, 1995Co-Authors: Marcus Klar, Robert Geisler, Felix CorneliusAbstract:The InterACT tool is an interactive theorem prover for algebraic specifications emphasizing User-Friendliness. InterACT is integrated in the existing ACT environment. The main purpose of InterACT is to teach formal methods in universitary courses about formal specification of software systems. It has already been used successfully in this area.
