
On the Expected Number of Iterations in ML-DSA Signing: A Complete Accounting of the Rejection Conditions
ePrint paper showing that FIPS 204 Table 1's expected iteration counts for the ML-DSA signing loop cover only the line-23 validity checks (z and r0 norms). They omit the two line-28 encoding-correctness checks (‖c·t0‖∞ and hint weight). It accounts for all four conditions: z by exact counting, c·t0 by an Irwin-Hall tail, and hint weight by a closed-form conditioned per-coefficient probability with a Monte Carlo tail estimate. Corrected expected iterations are 4.36, 5.14 and 3.91 for ML-DSA-44, -65 and -87, within 0.14% of an end-to-end measurement and consistent with NIST's FIPS 204 errata.
TL;DR Corrects FIPS 204's ML-DSA expected signing iterations to 4.36/5.14/3.91 by counting all four rejection conditions, not just two.
Organisations named here
- FIPS 204
- Irwin-Hall distribution
- ML-DSA
Technologies named here
- ML-DSA-44
- ML-DSA.Sign_internal
- Monte Carlo estimation
- ML-DSA-65
- ML-DSA-87
- FIPS 204 Table 1
- NIST
- CRYSTALS-Dilithium
Techniques named here
- Rejection sampling
Related in other

Rerandomizable Garbling for Arithmetic Circuits

