Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Comparison of Literature Review with BAAR.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Notations used in BAAR.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 1.

BAAR Scheme with Entities.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

End-to-end sequence of the BAAR protocols for anonymous and revocable user authentication.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Table 3.

Gas Cost & Transaction Time.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Complexity analysis of BAAR Scheme.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 3.

Comparative computational performance of BAAR and three baseline schemes— [36] and [37] across four cryptographic operations: Setup, Key Generation, Verification, and Revocation (log scale).

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Fig 4.

Comparison of cost of gas between BAAR and threshold credential scheme [37] to Create, Verify and Revocation operations.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Processing time of total revocation versus the number of revoked credentials, both representing scaling of accumulator updates of the scheme [14] and the proposed BAAR scheme with Merkle accumulators.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Latency per-revocation versus the number of revoked credentials, a comparison between the on-verification witness update strategy of [14] and that of the BAAR scheme proposed in Merkle accumulator, illustrating real-time operation cost differences.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Phase-wise execution time comparison between BAAR and [15] across Request, Generation, Validation, and Verification phases.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Scalability evaluation with increasing attribute vector length, showing performance and attribute privacy trade-offs between BAAR and [15].

More »

Fig 8 Expand