[noise] psk analysis, and ss/noss modifiers (was Re: Noise Explorer)

[Trevor Perrin]

On Mon, Aug 6, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Justin Cormack
<justin at specialbusservice.com> wrote:
> Looking at the ss modifer from the point of the generation rules, I
> think the best
> option may be to say that where there is an ss modifer it gets added after both
> the DH es, se have been added.


Those are nicer names, and I think that for the fundamental patterns,
your modifier rule gives the only possible message placement (or
alternative placement, for IK and KK).

But for deferred patterns, I think there are several patterns where ss
could potentially be placed 1 message earlier than your modifier rule,
and still satisfy the validity rules.

Below are the patterns where this came up.  I named the alternative
"1-message-earlier" patterns positionally, i.e. ss? where ? is the
message number with ss appended.

If I got this right, some options are:
 (a) convince ourselves these positionally-numbered patterns do not
deserve a name.
 (b) use the positionally-numbered modifiers, either always or as an
alternative when "ss" is insufficient.
 (c) come up with some more "generative" way of naming these
modifiers, e.g. a "deferred ss" modifier or something.


KX1ss:
  -> s
  ...
  -> e
  <- e, ee, se, s
  -> es, ss

KX1ss2:
  -> s
  ...
  -> e
  <- e, ee, se, s, ss
  -> es


X1Kss:
  <- s
  ...
  -> e, es
  <- e, ee
  -> s
  <- se, ss

X1Kss3:
  <- s
  ...
  -> e, es
  <- e, ee
  -> s, ss
  <- se


X1K1ss:
  <- s
  ...
  -> e
  <- e, ee, es
  -> s
  <- se, ss

X1K1ss3:
  <- s
  ...
  -> e
  <- e, ee, es
  -> s, ss
  <- se


X1Xss:
  -> e
  <- e, ee, s, es
  -> s
  <- se, ss

X1Xss3:
  -> e
  <- e, ee, s, es
  -> s, ss
  <- se


X1X1ss:
  -> e
  <- e, ee, s
  -> es, s
  <- se, ss

X1X1ss3:
  -> e
  <- e, ee, s
  -> es, s, ss
  <- se


IX1ss:
  -> e, s
  <- e, ee, se, s
  -> es, ss

IX1ss2:
  -> e, s
  <- e, ee, se, s, ss
  -> es

Trevor