We are not able to resolve this OAI Identifier to the repository landing page. If you are the repository manager for this record, please head to the Dashboard and adjust the settings.
In the present paper we introduce some sufficient conditions and a procedure for checking whether, for a given function, CCZ-equivalence is more general than EA-equivalence together with taking inverses of permutations. It is known from Budaghyan et al. (IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52.3, 1141–1152 2006; Finite Fields Appl. 15(2), 150–159 2009) that for quadratic APN functions (both monomial and polynomial cases) CCZ-equivalence is more general. We prove hereby that for non-quadratic APN functions CCZ-equivalence can be more general (by studying the only known APN function which is CCZ-inequivalent to both power functions and quadratics). On the contrary, we prove that for power non-Gold APN functions, CCZ equivalence coincides with EA-equivalence and inverse transformation for n ≤ 8. We conjecture that this is true for any n
Is data on this page outdated, violates copyrights or anything else? Report the problem now and we will take corresponding actions after reviewing your request.