# Using BSI AIS 20/31

Bundesamt für Sicherheit in five hundred Informationstechnik ( BSI ) AIS 20/31 is another ( european ) standard for sensitive randomness measurement. here TRNG designers are required to provide a stochastic model of the randomness beginning, so the information can be estimated in theory according to the model. The risk is that the model is unrepresentative of the sample data set, yet there is no hard prerequisite to assess the good of burst. It state that it should be checked to see if it fits, whilst at the same clock time being a dim-witted as possible. indeed the standard explicitly says : –

In detail, accurate forcible models of ‘ real-world ’ physical RNGs ( typically based on electronic circuits ) normally can not easily be formulated and are not analyzed .

We are not sure how we can comply for quantum information sources such as Zener diodes and photo-sensors, never mind JPEG encoding of them. The standard ( § 2.4.1 ) does not shy away from early compaction of the crude randomness signal to assist in eliminating elementary correlations. significant correlations remain debatable resulting in non- IID datum. This is another case of handling of the raw information anterior to measurement that is normally implied by standards [ 1 ] [ 2 ]. And in a parallel to 90B, gross errors will result if performed on data that significantly diverges from consistent, such as normal or log-normal distributions which are typical of Zener avalanche effect sample .
Analogue to digital converters ( ADCs ) and associated amplifiers are enormously influenced by batch rates and capacitance. There is even a capacitor specifically for holding the sample firm in an ADC. Photo-sensors affect adjacent photo-sensors in CMOS arrays. Junction capacitance affects Zener diodes. consequently, most real universe randomness samples are correlated. JPEG files are more correlative than most sensors. With this in heed, we will not aim for stochastic model of our information sources, but trust on address empiric measurement of distributions such as : –

#### Raw sample distribution from a single Zener diode.

We could take the hazardous approach and generate conservative models that grossly overestimate our randomness rates, ignore autocorrelation and then compensate downwards. A quantize log-normal distribution would seem a candidate fit to the above. In that character though, why not merely measure via compression and separate by a safety divisor ?
And the state of the art compressors ( cmix, paq8 etc. ) are amazingly accurate at randomness measurement. Testing against synthetic data sets suggests accuracy of 0.1 % compared to the theoretical Shannon entropies. Accuracy drops for more complex correlated data such as the classical enwik8/9 screen files from the Hutter Prize contest. fortunately, lifelike sample distribution data is not as complex nor american samoa correlated as language and Wikipedia entries. The above log-normal exercise only features an autocorrelation imprison of $nitrogen = 3$. Therefore information measurement via strong compression is valid and accurate to within the theoretical 0.1 % design. big correlation coefficient interim is improbable to exceed $n = 100$ in the majority of cases. If measurement accuracy is defined as $\frac { H_ { theoretical } } { H_ { compress } }$, then we find the following normalize relationship for smallish $nitrogen$ : –

#### Normalised theoretical to compressive entropy measurement accuracy.

The curvature ultimately becomes asymptotic to some obscure erroneousness rate at the Kolmogorov ( algorithmic ) complexity of the sample data as $north \rightarrow \infty$. You can choose to believe in the Hilberg Conjecture [ 3 ] if you want to, but it seems like mathematical hubris to attempt to reduce Shakespeare ’ randomness biography work to just $Bn^ { \beta }$ .
References : –

[ 1 ] John Kelsey, Kerry A. McKay and Meltem Sönmez Turan, Predictive Models for Min-Entropy Estimation .
[ 2 ] Joseph D. Hart, Yuta Terashima, Atsushi Uchida, Gerald B. Baumgartner, Thomas E. Murphy and Rajarshi Roy, Recommendations and illustrations for the evaluation of photonic random number generators .
[ 3 ] Hilberg W., Der bekannte Grenzwert five hundred redundanzfreien Information in Texten – eine Fehlinterpretation five hundred Shannonschen Experimente ? Frequenz 44, 1990, pp. 243–248 .