2017
DOI: 10.1587/elex.14.20160797
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reduced complexity polynomial multiplier architecture for finite fields <i>GF</i>(2<i><sup>m</sup></i>)

Abstract: This letter presents a low-complexity semi-systolic array implementation for polynomial multiplication over GF(2 m ). We consider finite field Montgomery modular multiplication (MMM) based on two-level parallel computing approach to reduce the cell delay, latency, and area-time (AT) complexity. Compared to related multipliers, the proposed scheme yields significantly lower AT complexity.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…But our multiplier has the least time and area-time complexity among multipliers in Table I and its throughput is 1. Although the area complexity of our multiplier is nearly the same with Kim-Kim [15], our multiplier saves about 64.9%, 49.9%, and 50.0% time complexities as compared to Huang [13], Kim-Kim [15], and Choi-Lee [24], respectively. Considering AT (area-time) complexity, our multiplier saves about 68.1%, 49.7%, and 23.7% as compared to Huang [13], Kim-Kim [15], and Choi-Lee [24], respectively.…”
Section: Complexity Analysis and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…But our multiplier has the least time and area-time complexity among multipliers in Table I and its throughput is 1. Although the area complexity of our multiplier is nearly the same with Kim-Kim [15], our multiplier saves about 64.9%, 49.9%, and 50.0% time complexities as compared to Huang [13], Kim-Kim [15], and Choi-Lee [24], respectively. Considering AT (area-time) complexity, our multiplier saves about 68.1%, 49.7%, and 23.7% as compared to Huang [13], Kim-Kim [15], and Choi-Lee [24], respectively.…”
Section: Complexity Analysis and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…A comparison between the proposed and the related semi-systolic multipliers is given in Table I. Although Choi-Lee's multiplier [24] has the least area complexity among multipliers in Table I, its throughput is 1/2. But our multiplier has the least time and area-time complexity among multipliers in Table I and its throughput is 1.…”
Section: Complexity Analysis and Conclusionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation