The q-gradient method for global optimization

The q-gradient is an extension of the classical gradient vector based on the concept of Jackson's derivative. Here we introduce a preliminary version of the q-gradient method for unconstrained global optimization. The main idea behind our approach is the use of the negative of the q-gradient of the objective function as the search direction. In this sense, the method here proposed is a generalization of the well-known steepest descent method. The use of Jackson's derivative has shown to be an effective mechanism for escaping from local minima. The q-gradient method is complemented with strategies to generate the parameter q and to compute the step length in a way that the search process gradually shifts from global in the beginning to almost local search in the end. For testing this new approach, we considered six commonly used test functions and compared our results with three Genetic Algorithms (GAs) considered effective in optimizing multidimensional unimodal and multimodal functions. For the multimodal test functions, the q-gradient method outperformed the GAs, reaching the minimum with a better accuracy and with less function evaluations.Comment: 12 pages, 1 figur

Using classifiers to predict linear feedback shift registers

Proceeding of: IEEE 35th International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology. October 16-19, 2001, LondonPreviously (J.C. Hernandez et al., 2000), some new ideas that justify the use of artificial intelligence techniques in cryptanalysis are presented. The main objective of that paper was to show that the theoretical next bit prediction problem can be transformed into a classification problem, and this classification problem could be solved with the aid of some AI algorithms. In particular, they showed how a well-known classifier called c4.5 could predict the next bit generated by a linear feedback shift register (LFSR, a widely used model of pseudorandom number generator) very efficiently and, most importantly, without any previous knowledge over the model used. The authors look for other classifiers, apart from c4.5, that could be useful in the prediction of LFSRs. We conclude that the selection of c4.5 by Hernandez et al. was adequate, because it shows the best accuracy of all the classifiers tested. However, we have found other classifiers that produce interesting results, and we suggest that these algorithms must be taken into account in the future when trying to predict more complex LFSR-based models. Finally, we show some other properties that make the c4.5 algorithm the best choice for this particular cryptanalytic problem.Publicad