Develops a secure question generation system, implying reduced risk of leaks.
The integrity of large-scale academic and competitive examination systems continues to be underminedby question-paper leaks. Conventional examination workflows depend on a pre-compiled paper thatpasses through a long chain of custody — authoring, moderation, printing, physical transport, and strongroom storage — each stage introducing an independent point of exposure. This paper presents OnDemand Randomized Question Generation (ORQG), a decentralized, cryptographically secure assessmentframework in which the final examination instrument is not compiled in advance. Instead, a unique paperis synthesized locally at each examination center, 15–30 minutes before the test begins, using aCryptographically Secure Pseudo-Random Number Generator (CSPRNG) applied to a large, encrypted,continuously growing central question bank under a fixed psychometric blueprint. We formalize thegeneration process with set-theoretic and combinatorial models, specify a CSPRNG-based referenceimplementation using Python's secrets module, and present a formal security analysis mapped tostandard properties (confidentiality, integrity, availability, authentication, auditability, and nonrepudiation) together with an explicit threat model and its limits. We report results from a Monte Carlosimulation of 500 independently generated papers drawn from a 90,000-item pool, measuring generationlatency, inter-paper overlap (Jaccard similarity), and the combinatorial entropy of the design space. Wefurther develop an Item Response Theory (IRT)-based normalization procedure to preserve scorecomparability across non-identical papers, and we discuss the residual risks the framework does noteliminate. Rather than claiming that leakage becomes impossible, we show that ORQG shifts the attacksurface from a single, high-value, long-lived artifact to many short-lived, low-value, isolated artifacts, andwe quantify by how much the associated risk is reduced under stated assumptions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Akhilesh Tripathi (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: