Designs, linear codes, plateaued functions, and their interconnections

The proof is straightforward.

Let

We only need to prove that the rank of G is m+2 if and only if f \circ \sigma^{-1} is non-affine. For any u \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, t, s \in \mathbb{F}_{2}, the Hamming weight of the vector c(t, u, s)=(t, u, s)G is given as follows:

Note that if w(c(t, u, 0))=0, then u={\bf{0}},t=0. If there is (u_{0}, t_{0}) \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2} such that w(c(t_{0}, u_{0}, 1))=0, then |W_{f\circ \sigma^{-1}}(u_{0})|=2^m. In this case, the Parseval’s identity guarantees that W_{f\circ \sigma^{-1}}(x)=0 for any x \neq u_{0}, and then f\circ \sigma^{-1} is an affine function. Therefore, if f \circ \sigma^{-1} is non-affine, then w(c(t, u, s))=0 if and only if (t, u, s)=(0,{\bf{0}},0), and the rank of G is m+2. Conversely, if f \circ \sigma^{-1} is affine, then there is (a, b) \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2} such that f \circ \sigma^{-1}(x)=a \cdot x+b, and w(c(b, a, 1))=0 since W_{f \circ \sigma^{-1}}(a)=2^m(-1)^{b}. Thus, if f \circ \sigma^{-1} is affine, then the rank of G is not m+2. This completes the proof.

(i). We have that for u\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 and b\in B,

and the first assertion follows. The second assertion follows from that \chi_{\mathbf{0}}(B^{f_b})=|B^{f_b}|.

(ii). We have

where \delta is the Kronecker delta function, and the assertion follows.

(iii). We have that for two distinct points p,q\in P,

and the assertion follows.

(iv) We have

and the assertion follows.

Let f_b(x)=b\cdot x for b\in {\mathcal{C}}^*. We will check the three conditions of Corollary 1. First, we have that for any b\in {\mathcal{C}}^*,

which is a constant. Next, we have that for any p\in {\mathcal{C}}^*,

which is a constant. Finally, we have that for two distinct points p,q\in {\mathcal{C}}^*,

which is a constant. The parameters are computed by using Corollary 1.

(i) \Longrightarrow (ii): It was verified in [B, Theorem 11.9].

(ii) \Longrightarrow (i): Assume that f(p)+f^*(\pi b)+p\cdot\pi b =f(p+b) for some linear permutation \pi of \mathbb{F}_2^m. By plugging p=\mathbf{0}, we have f^*(\pi b)=f(b)+f(\mathbf{0}) for all b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2, and so

for all p,b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2. Let g be the function of x,y\in \mathbb{F}_2^m defined by

Then g(p,b)=0 for all p,b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 by Eq. (?), and so the Boolean g is identically zero, that is, g\equiv 0. Notice that the degree of f(x)+f(y)+f(x+y) is equal to the degree of f. Observe that the degree of x\cdot\pi y is two, since \pi is linear. Hence f is quadratic using Eq. (?). This completes the proof.

The result follows by noting that x\in B^{f_{b_1}}\Delta B^{f_{b_2}}\Delta B^{f_{b_3}} if and only if x is in exactly one of B^{f_{b_1}}, B^{f_{b_2}} and B^{f_{b_3}} or in all of three of them, which is f_{b_1}(x)+f_{b_2}(x)+f_{b_3}(x)=1.

From this point onward, we represent f_1(x)\fallingdotseq f_2(x) if f_1(x)=f_2(x)+s for all x\in\mathbb{F}_2^n and a constant s\in\mathbb{F}_2.

(\Leftarrow): Let f(x,y)=x\cdot y+g(y) with deg g \le 3. By Lemma 4, we have to show that for any a_1,a_2,a_3,b_1,b_2,b_3\in\mathbb{F}_2^m, there are a_4,b_4\in\mathbb{F}_2^m such that f(x+a_1,y+b_1)+f(x+a_2,y+b_2)+f(x+a_3,y+b_3)\fallingdotseq f(x+a_4,y+b_4). Observe that x+a_1 and y+b_1 can be treated as x and y, respectively. It is thus enough to show that for any a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{F}_2^m, there are \alpha,\beta\in\mathbb{F}_2^m such that

for all x,y\in \mathbb{F}_2^m. Since f(x,y)=x\cdot y +g(y), then

If g is a constant or linear, then g(y)+g(y+b)+g(y+d)\fallingdotseq g(y+b+d), and Eq. (?) holds when \alpha=a+c and \beta=b+d. Next we consider the quadratic Boolean function h_1(x_1,x_2)=x_1 x_2. Then

If g is a quadratic Boolean function, then g(y)+g(y+b)+g(y+d)\fallingdotseq g(y+b+d) since g is a linear combination of monomials whose degree is less than or equal to two. Therefore Eq. (?) holds when \alpha=a+c and \beta=b+d. Next we consider the cubic Boolean function h_2(x_1,x_2,x_3)=x_1x_2x_3. Then,

Thus if g is a cubic Boolean function, then

where \gamma_i\in\mathbb{F}_2 are constants which depend on b and d, and y\in\mathbb{F}_2^m. That is,

Therefore, f(x,y)=x\cdot y+g(y) induces a TSDP design when deg g \le 3.

(\Rightarrow): Let f(x,y)=x\cdot y+g(y) be an M-M bent function with deg g \ge 4. Assume that f induces a TSDP design. By Lemma 4, for all a,b,c,d\in\mathbb{F}_2^m, there exist \alpha,\beta\in\mathbb{F}_2^m such that

If y={\bf 0} in Eq. (?),

Since f(x+\alpha,\beta)=(x+\alpha)\cdot \beta+g(\beta)\fallingdotseq x\cdot \beta, we obtain that x\cdot (b+d)\fallingdotseq x\cdot \beta. So it follows that \beta=b+d. If x={\bf 0} in Eq. (?),

Note that f(\alpha,y+\beta)=\alpha\cdot(y+\beta)+g(y+\beta)\fallingdotseq \alpha\cdot y+g(y+\beta). Since \beta=b+d, we have

which implies that

Let g be a Boolean function of degree k\geq 4 that contains at least one monomial h_1(y_1,\ldots,y_m):=\prod_{i=1}^{k}y_i of degree k. Then the degree of h_1(y)+h_1(y+b)+h_1(y+d)+h_1(y+b+d) is k-2, which implies that the degree of g(y)+g(y+b)+g(y+d)+g(y+b+d) in Eq. (?) is at most k-2.

Now let g(x)=h(x)+r(x), where h(x) is a Boolean function with degree k terms and each term involves \prod_{i=1}^{k-2}y_i, and r(x) is remained terms of g(x). Then h(x)=\prod_{i=1}^{k-2}y_i\sum_{(i,j)\in I}y_iy_j for some subset I\subset \{1,\ldots, m\}\times\{1,\ldots, m\}. Note that I is nonempty, since (k-1,k-2)\in I.

It is obvious that h_1(y)+h_1(y+b)+h_1(y+d)+h_1(y+b+d) consists of a y_1y_2\cdots y_{k-2} term with coefficient b_{k-1}d_k+b_kd_{k-1}. Then the coefficient of \prod_{i=1}^{k-2}y_i in g(y)+g(y+b)+g(y+d)+g(y+b+d), which is the same as the coefficient of \prod_{i=1}^{k-2}y_i in h(y)+h(y+b)+h(y+d)+h(y+b+d), is \sum_{(i,j)\in I}{b_id_j+b_jd_i}. Therefore the coefficient of \prod_{i=1}^{k-2}y_i is not identically zero, and it implies that the degree of g(y)+g(y+b)+g(y+d)+g(y+b+d) is k-2 which is at least 2. This is a contradiction to (?) and completes the proof.

In view of the identity that \sum_{x\in\mathbb{F}^m_2}W_f(x)^2=2^{2m}, we have |P|=2^{m-r}. By the inversion formula for f, we have

It follows that for b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2,

for p\in P,

and for two distinct points p,q\in P,

The parameters are computed by those three values of summations using Theorem 1.

The third condition in Corollary 1 is equivalent to that |\{x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: f(x)+f(x+a)=0\}| is a constant for any a \neq \bf{0}. Assume that |\{x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: f(x)+f(x+a)=0\}| is a constant for any a \neq\bf{0} and denoted the constant by \ell. Then

which implies that \ell=\frac{2^{2m-1}-2^m+\frac{1}{2}W_{f}({\bf{0}})^{2}}{2^m-1}. If {\bf{0}} \notin S_{f}, then 2^m-1 \mid 2^{m}(2^{m-1}-1), which implies that m=r=1, and so f(x)=x+s for x,s \in \mathbb{F}_{2}. If {\bf{0}} \in S_{f} (that is, W_{f}({\bf{0}})^{2}=2^{m+r}), then 2^m-1 \mid 2^m(2^{m-1}+2^{r-1}-1), which implies that r=m, and so f is a constant function as {\bf{0}} \in S_{f}. This completes the proof.

(i) \Longleftrightarrow (ii): A design is not simple if and only if there is exactly one intersection number which is equal to size of a block k. In Lemma 5, the design is not simple if and only if

for some distinct a,b\in\mathbb{F}_2^m. That is, 2^m=(-1)^{f(a)+f(b)}C_f(a+b) and |C_f(a+b)|=2^m for some distinct a,b\in\mathbb{F}_2^m which implies that f has a nonzero linear structure. Therefore, the design in Lemma 5 is simple if and only if f has no nonzero linear structure.

(ii) \Longleftrightarrow (iii): See [HP].

(iii) \Longleftrightarrow (iv): Note that (iii) and (iv) both imply that f is non-affine, namely r<m. Then the rank of G_{f} is m+2 whenever (iii) or (iv) holds. For each p\in S_{f}, let f_b(p)=b\cdot p+g(p)+f(b) for any b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 by our assumption. Notice that {(f_b(p))_{b\in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}}=(g(p),p,1)G_f. By Lemma 1, the binary linear code \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_{f}} is \langle\{(g(p), p, 1)G_{f}: p \in S_{f}\}\rangle =\{c(t, u, s)=(t, u, s)G_{f}: (t, u, s) \in \langle\{(g(p), p, 1): p \in S_{f}\}\rangle\}. Define

Therefore, (iv) holds if and only if the rank of G_{g} is m+2. The Hamming weight of the vector d(t, u, s)=(t, u, s)G_{g} is given as follows:

By the inversion formula for f, \sum_{x \in S_{f}}(-1)^{g(x)+u \cdot x}=2^{\frac{m-r}{2}}(-1)^{f(u)}, and then w(d(t, u, 1)) \neq 0 by r<m. By \textbf{0} \in E and |E|=2^{m-r}, w(d(t, u, s))=0 if and only if s=0, t=u \cdot a, u \cdot x=0 for all x \in E. Thus the rank of G_{g} is m+2 if and only if (iii) holds.

(i) \Longrightarrow (ii): Let \mathbb{D}=({P},\mathcal{B}) be a 2-design such that {P}=\{0,1,\ldots,2^{m-r}-1\} (0\leq r<m) is a point set of \mathbb{D} and \mathcal{B} is a collection of block sets satisfying the TSDP with |\mathcal{B}| = 2^m. To avoid confusion in this proof, we let p denote a point in {P}. Since \mathbb{D} satisfies the TSDP, by the proof of [B, Theorem 9.11], for a fixed block B_{0} \in \mathcal{B}, we can label all blocks by vectors in \mathbb{F}_2^m such that for all x, y \in \mathbb{F}_2^m, up to complementation,

and then we label each point p\in {P} with a vector z = \sum_{i=1}^{{m}} z_i e_i \in \mathbb{F}_2^m, where \{e_{1}, \dots, e_{m}\} is a standard basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} (that is, e_{1}=(1, 0, \dots, 0, 0), \dots, e_{m}=(0, 0, \dots, 0, 1)) and

where [\cdot] is 1 if the condition holds and 0 otherwise, and \oplus is addition mod 2. Thus there is an injection \varphi: P \to \mathbb{F}_2^m and for each point p\in P,

For the point 0 \in {P}, we define a Boolean function f: \mathbb{F}_2^m \to \mathbb{F}_2 by f(x)=[0 \in B_{x}].

From the labeling procedure, we observe that

for each nonzero vector x \in \mathbb{F}_2^m, the value \varphi(p) \cdot x is a constant for all p \in B_{0} \triangle B_x. Indeed, by (?), for any nonzero x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} (denoting x=e_{i_{1}}+\dots+e_{i_{t}}) and p \in {P}, we have \varphi(p) \cdot x=\sum_{j=1}^{t}([p \in B_{0} \triangle B_{e_{i_{j}}}]\oplus [0 \in B_{0} \triangle B_{e_{i_{j}}}]). From (Proof), the value of \varphi(p) \cdot x are determined by [p \in B_{0} \triangle B_{x}] and [0 \in B_{0} \triangle B_{x}]. Using this observation and defining f_{b}(\varphi(p))=[p \in B_{b}], we have that f_{b}(\varphi(p))+\varphi(p) \cdot b+f(b) depends only on p\in {P}. Denote g(\varphi(p))=f_{b}(\varphi(p))+\varphi(p) \cdot b+f(b). To improve readability in the proof, let \varphi(P)=\{\overline p\in\mathbb{F}^m_2:p\in P \}. Then the incidence matrix of \mathbb{D} is represented as (f_b(\overline p))_{\overline p \in \varphi(P), b \in \mathbb{F}_2^m}, where

for some Boolean function g: \varphi({P})\to \mathbb{F}_2. The parameters of the design implies that the replication number is 2^{\frac{m+r}{2}} and W_f(x)=(-1)^{g(x)}2^{\frac{m+r}{2}} for all x\in {\varphi({P})}. Note that |{P}|=2^{m-r} and the Parseval’s identity guarantees that W_f(x)=0 for x\in\mathbb{F}_2^m\backslash {\varphi({P})}. Thus f is an r-plateaued function with S_{f}=\varphi({P}). Thus \mathbb{D} is isomorphic to a design derived from f by Lemma 5. Since \mathbb{D} is simple, f has no nonzero linear structure by Lemma 6.

(ii) \Longrightarrow (i): By assumption, we have \mathbb{D}=\mathbb{AD}_f for some plateaued function f with no nonzero linear structure. By Lemma 5, we also have f_b(p)=b\cdot p+f(b)+g(p). Let us denote by D_f the f^{-1}(1) for f\in \mathcal{BF}_m. For a\in\mathbb{F}^m_2, we define \ell_a(x)=a\cdot x for all x\in\mathbb{F}^m_2. Then for b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2, B^{f_b} equals D_{g+\ell_b} if f(b)=0 and D_{g+\ell_b+1} otherwise. Set h_{b,\varepsilon}=g+\ell_b+\varepsilon for some constant \varepsilon\in\mathbb{F}^m_2. Then for each b, b', b''\in\mathbb{F}_2^m and \varepsilon=\varepsilon_1+\varepsilon_2+\varepsilon_3, we have

which is a block labeled by b+b'+b'' or its complement by assuming that the three blocks D_{h_{b,\varepsilon_i}} for b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 and i=1,2,3 are distinct. This prove that \mathbb{D}=\mathbb{D}_f has the TSDP.

(ii) \Longrightarrow (iii): It follows from Lemma 6.

(iii) \Longrightarrow (ii): Since \mathbb{D} is a 2-design with parameters (2^{m-r},2^{m-r-1}-2^{\frac{m-r-2}{2}},2^{m-2}-2^{\frac{{m+r-2}}{2}}), then the number of blocks is

Denote M(\mathbb{D})=(m_{i, j})_{1 \leq i \leq 2^{m-r}, 1 \leq j \leq 2^m}. Let P be a subset of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} with size 2^{m-r} and P=\{p_{1}, \dots, p_{2^{m-r}}\}, and let \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}=\{b_{1}, \dots, b_{2^m}\}. Define f_{b_{j}}(p_{i})=m_{i, j}, 1 \leq i \leq 2^{m-r}, 1 \leq j \leq 2^m. By Theorem 1,

Note that a generator matrix of \mathrm{RM}(1, m) is

As the dimension of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{D}} is m+2, we have a codeword \alpha=(\alpha_{1}, \dots, \alpha_{2^m}) \in \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{D}} \backslash \mathrm{RM}(1, m). Define f(b_{j})=\alpha_{j}, 1 \leq j \leq 2^{m}. In the following, we prove that f is r-plateaued. By the above arguments, a generator matrix of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{D}} is

Note that (f_{b}(p))_{b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}} is a codeword. Then there is unique (t(p), u(p), s(p)) \in \mathbb{F}_{2} \times \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2} such that f_{b}(p)=t(p)+u(p)\cdot b+s(p)f(b). If s(p)=0, then \sum_{b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}(-1)^{f_{b}(p)}=\sum_{b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}(-1)^{t(p)+u(p)\cdot b}=(-1)^{t(p)}\delta_{\textbf{0}}(u(p))2^m, which contradicts Eq. (?). Therefore, for any p \in P, b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m},

By Eqs. (?) and (?), for any distinct p, q \in P, we have

which implies that u(p) \neq u(q) for any distinct p, q \in P. Then the size of S\triangleq\{u(p): p \in P\} is 2^{m-r}. By Eqs. (?) and (?), we have

which implies that |W_{f}(u(p))|=2^{\frac{m+r}{2}} for any u(p) \in S. The Parseval’s identity guarantees that W_{f}(a)=0 for any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \backslash S. Thus f is r-plateaued with S_{f}=S and t(p)=g(u(p)), where W_{f}(x)=2^{\frac{m+r}{2}}(-1)^{g(x)}1_{S_{f}}(x). Then by Eq. (?), f_{b}(p)=f(b)+g(u(p))+u(p) \cdot b. Hence \mathbb{D} is isomorphic to the addition design \mathbb{AD}_{f} derived from f. By Lemma 6, f has no nonzero linear structure.

This completes the proof.

(i) \Longrightarrow (ii): We can write W_f(x)=(-1)^{\tilde{f}(x)}2^{\frac{m+r}{2}} for x\in S_f and W_g(x)=(-1)^{\tilde{g}(x)}2^{\frac{m+r}{2}} for x\in S_g. Since f and g are equivalent, there is an affine permutation \sigma of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and y \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, s \in \mathbb{F}_{2} such that f(x)=g(\sigma x)+y \cdot x+s \text{ for all }x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. For p \in S_{f}, we have

Here \sigma^{-1} is an affine permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Denote \sigma^{-1} x=\tau x+\gamma, where \tau is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and \gamma \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Let \tau^{*} (Since \tau is a linear function of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, then y \cdot \tau(x) is a linear Boolean function for any y \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Hence, there is \tau^{*}(y) \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} such that y \cdot \tau(x)=\tau^{*}(y) \cdot x. If \tau^{*}(y)=\tau^{*}(y'), then y \cdot \tau(x)=y' \cdot \tau(x) for all x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. As \tau is a permutation, we obtain y=y', and thus \tau^{*} is a permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}.) be the adjoint permutation of \tau, that is, y \cdot \tau(x)=\tau^{*}(y) \cdot x. Then

which implies that \tau^{*}(y+p) \in S_{g} and \widetilde{f}(p)=\widetilde{g}(\tau^{*}(y+p))+(y+p) \cdot \gamma+s. Then for p \in S_{f} and b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, we have

Since \sigma(b) \cdot \tau^{*}(y+p)=\tau(\sigma b) \cdot (y+p)=(b+\gamma) \cdot (y+p),

which implies that \mathbb{AD}_f and \mathbb{AD}_g are isomorphic.

(ii) \Longrightarrow (iii): Let M_{f} and M_{g} be the incidence matrices of the designs \mathbb{AD}_f and \mathbb{AD}_g, respectively.

By the definition of a code equivalence, we have that

(iii) \Longrightarrow (i): By Lemma 6, a generator matrix of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} is G_{f}. Then \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} is the dual of the code \mathcal C_1(f) defined in [EP]. The result follows from the fact that two codes are equivalent if and only if their duals are equivalent, together with [EP, Theorem 9].

This completes the proof.

Observe that the design held by codewords of weight j\neq 0 in {\mathcal{C}} generated by M(\mathbb{D}) for any 2-design in terms of (f_b(p))_{p\in P, b\in B}=uG; the codewords of weight j relies on u. By [DMT, Theorem 12], the weight distribution of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} is given by

(i). The minimum weight codewords of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} are (f^{*}(p)+b \cdot p+f(b))_{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}, where b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Since the dual f^{*} satisfies (f^{*})^{*}(x)=f(x), we have f^{*}_{b}(p)=f^{*}(p)+b \cdot p+f(b). Thus, the support of the codeword (f^{*}(p)+b \cdot p+f(b))_{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}} is \{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: f^{*}_{b}(p)=1\}, which shows the design of the minimum weight codewords of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} is \mathbb{AD}_{f^{*}}.

(ii). The codewords with weight 2^{m-1}+2^{m/2-1} of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} are (f^{*}(p)+b \cdot p+f(b)+1)_{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}, where b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Thus, the support of the codeword (f^{*}(p)+b \cdot p+f(b)+1)_{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}} is \{p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: f^{*}_{b}(p)=0\}, which shows the design of the codewords with weight 2^{m-1}+2^{m/2-1} of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} is the complement of \mathbb{AD}_{f^{*}}.

(\Longleftarrow): If f and g are affine equivalent, then there is an affine permutation \pi of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} such that f(x)=g(\pi x). Thus x \in D_{f} if and only if x \in \pi^{-1}D_{g}. For any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and b \in \mathbb{F}_{2},

which implies that \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} and \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_g} are equivalent.

(\Longrightarrow): Let \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} and \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_g} be equivalent. If (m, r)=(2, 0), then by |D_{f}|=|D_{g}| and all bent functions are with the form x_{1}x_{2}+c_{1}x_{1}+c_{2}x_{2}+c_{0} (where c_{0}, c_{1}, c_{2} \in \mathbb{F}_{2}), we have f(x_{1}, x_{2}), g(x_{1}, x_{2}) \in \{x_{1}x_{2}, x_{1}(x_{2}+1), (x_{1}+1)x_{2}, (x_{1}+1)(x_{2}+1)\}, or f(x_{1}, x_{2}), g(x_{1}, x_{2}) \in \{x_{1}x_{2}+1, x_{1}(x_{2}+1)+1, (x_{1}+1)x_{2}+1, (x_{1}+1)(x_{2}+1)+1\}. Hence, f and g are affine equivalent. In the following, we consider the case (m, r) \neq (2, 0). Since \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} and \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_g} are equivalent, then there is a bijection \pi: D_{f} \rightarrow D_{g} such that for any (a, b) \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2}, there is a unique (\mathcal{T}(a, b), \mathcal{U}(a, b)) \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2} satisfying a \cdot x+b=\mathcal{T}(a, b) \cdot \pi x+\mathcal{U}(a, b) \text{ for all } x \in D_{f}. Simply denote \mathcal{T}(a, 0)=\mathcal{T}(a) and \mathcal{U}(a, 0)=\mathcal{U}(a). Then

By Eq. (?), we have

Denote D_{g}=y_{0}+E_{g}, where y_{0} \in D_{g}. Note that {\bf{0}} \in E_{g}. By Eq. (?), for any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, we have

Adding Eqs. (?) and (?), for any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m},

By Eq. (?), for any a, a' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and y \in E_{g}, we obtain

We claim that for any r-plateaued function g \in \mathcal{BF}_{m} with no nonzero structure (where (m, r) \neq (2, 0)), E_{g} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. For any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, we have

Denote E_{g}^{\bot}=\{a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: a \cdot y=0 \text{ for all } y \in E_{g}\}. As easily seen, E_{g}^{\bot} is a linear subspace and E_{g}^{\bot}=\langle E_{g}\rangle^{\bot}. Assume that E_{g} does not contain any basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Then there is nonzero a_{0} \in E_{g}^{\bot}, and by Eq. (?),

Since |E_{g}| \in \{2^{m-1}, 2^{m-1}+2^{\frac{m+r}{2}-1}, 2^{m-1}-2^{\frac{m+r}{2}-1}\} and |W_{g}(a_{0})| \in \{0, 2^{\frac{m+r}{2}}\}, then Eq. (?) implies that r=m-2 and |E_{g}|=2^{m-2}. Note that when |E_{g}|=2^{m-2}, then g is unbalanced (that is, {\bf{0}} \in S_{g}), and |E_{g}^{\bot}| \in \{2, 4\} as the dimension of \langle E_{g}\rangle is not less than m-2. If r=m-2 and |E_{g}|=2^{m-2}, then for any a \in S_{g} \backslash \{{\bf{0}}\}, by Eq. (?), we have \pm 2^{m-1}=2(-1)^{a \cdot y_{0}+1}\sum_{y \in E_{g}}(-1)^{a \cdot y}, which implies that \sum_{y \in E_{g}}(-1)^{a \cdot y}= \pm 2^{m-2}=\pm|E_{g}|. As {\bf{0}} \in E_{g}, then for any a \in S_{g} \backslash \{{\bf{0}}\}, we have a \cdot y=0 for all y \in E_{g}, that is, a \in E_{g}^{\bot} \backslash \{{\bf{0}}\}. Hence S_{g} \subseteq E_{g}^{\bot}. By |S_{g}|=2^{m-r}=4 and |E_{g}^{\bot}| \in \{2, 4\}, we have S_{g}=E_{g}^{\bot} is a 2-dimensional subspace of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, which contradicts that g has no nonzero linear structure and (m, r) \neq (2, 0). By the above arguments, E_{g} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}.

Since E_{g} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, then by Eq. (?), we obtain \mathcal{T}(a+a')+\mathcal{T}(a)+\mathcal{T}(a')=0 for any a, a' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Therefore \mathcal{T}(a) is a linear function from \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} to \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. For a, a' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, if \mathcal{T}(a)=\mathcal{T}(a'), then \mathcal{U}(a) \neq \mathcal{U}(a'), and by Eq. (?), (a+a') \cdot x=1 for all x \in D_{f}. Denote D_{f}=x_{0}+E_{f}, where x_{0} \in D_{f}. Then (a+a') \cdot x=1+(a+a') \cdot x_{0} for all x \in E_{f}. Since {\bf{0}} \in E_{f}, we obtain 1+(a+a') \cdot x_{0}=(a+a') \cdot {\bf{0}}=0, and then (a+a') \cdot x=0 for all x \in E_{f}. Recall that we have proved that E_{f} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, thus a=a', and \mathcal{T}(a) is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. By Eq. (?), for any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m},

Let \mathcal{T}^{*}(a) be the adjoint permutation of \mathcal{T}(a), that is, for any a, z \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, \mathcal{T}(a) \cdot z=a \cdot \mathcal{T}^{*}(z). Note that \mathcal{T}^{*} is linear. Adding Eqs. (?) and (?), for any a \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and x \in E_{f}, we have

which implies that

By Eq. (?), \pi x=(\mathcal{T}^{*})^{-1}(x_{0}+x)+\pi x_{0} \text{ for all } x \in D_{f}. Extending \pi: \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \rightarrow \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} by \pi x=(\mathcal{T}^{*})^{-1}(x_{0}+x)+\pi x_{0} \text{ for any } x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Since (\mathcal{T}^{*})^{-1} is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, then it is easy to verify that \pi is an affine permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Since \pi is an affine permutation with \pi D_{f}=D_{g}, then f(x)=g(\pi x) \text{ for all } x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, that is, f and g are affine equivalent.

(i). We will check the three conditions of Corollary 1. Firstly, for b\in\mathbb{F}^{m}_2\setminus\{{\bf{0}}\}, we have

Next, by symmetry that for p \in D_{f}, we have

Finally, for two distinct points p,q\in D_f,

The parameters are computed by those three values of summations using Corollary 1.

(ii). The point-block intersection numbers are

(iii). Notice that for any p \in D_{f}, (f_{b}(p))_{b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}\setminus\{{\bf{0}}\}}=(p, f(p))G_{f^{*}}^{''}, where G_{f^{*}}^{''}=\begin{pmatrix} \cdots & b^T & \cdots \\ \cdots & f^{*}(b) & \cdots \end{pmatrix}_{b\in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}\setminus\{{\bf{0}}\}}. By [M, Theorem 18.3.4], the rank of G_{f^{*}}^{''} is m+1. By Lemma 1, the binary linear code \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{D}_{f}} is \langle\{(p, f(p))G_{f^{*}}^{''}: p \in D_{f}\}\rangle=\{(t, u)G_{f^{*}}^{''}: (t, u) \in \langle\{(p, f(p)): p \in D_{f}\}\rangle\}. Since the dimension of \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} is m+1, that is, \langle\{(p, f(p)): p \in D_{f}\}\rangle=\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \times \mathbb{F}_{2}, then G_{f^{*}}^{''} is a generator matrix of \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{D}_{f}}, and the rank of \mathbb{D}_{f} is m+1. This completes the proof.

(i). By [DC, Theorem 1], the middle weight codewords of \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} are (b \cdot p+f^{*}(b))_{p \in D_{f}}, where b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}. Recall that f_{b}(x)=b \cdot x+f^{*}(b). Then the support of the middle weight codeword (b \cdot p+f^{*}(b))_{p \in D_{f}} is \{p \in D_{f}: f_{b}(p)=1\}, where b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}. Thus the design of the middle weight codewords of \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} is \mathbb{D}_f.

(ii). By [DC, Theorem 1], the minimum weight codewords of \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} are (b \cdot p+f^{*}(b)+1)_{p \in D_{f}}, where b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}. Then the support of the minimum weight codeword (b \cdot p+f^{*}(b)+1)_{p \in D_{f}} is \{p \in D_{f}: f_{b}(p)=0\}, where b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}. Thus, the design of the minimum weight codewords of \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} is the complement of \mathbb{D}_f.

(i) \Longleftrightarrow (iii): The result follows from Theorem 5.

(iv) \Longleftrightarrow (v): The result follows from Proposition 5.

(ii) \Longleftrightarrow (iv): The result follows from Proposition 5.

(i) \Longrightarrow (ii): Since f and g are affine equivalent, then there is an affine permutation \pi of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} such that g(x)=f(\pi x). Observe that \pi(D_{g})=D_{f}. Denote \pi x=xA+c for A \in \operatorname{GL}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2}) and c \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. For any b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, we have

Thus,

Let \sigma x=x(A^{-1})^{T}. Note that \sigma{\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}={\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}. Then by Eq. (?), for any b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*} and x \in D_{g},

which shows that \mathbb{D}_{f} and \mathbb{D}_{g} are isomorphic.

(ii) \Longrightarrow (i): By the proof of Theorem 5, f and g are affine equivalent when m=2. In the following, let m \geq 4. Without loss of generality, let {\bf{0}} \in D_{g}. Since \mathbb{D}_{f} and \mathbb{D}_{g} are isomorphic, then there is a permutation \sigma of {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*} and a bijection \pi from D_{g} to D_{f}, such that for any b \in {\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*} and x \in D_{g}, b \cdot x+g^{*}(b)=\sigma b \cdot \pi x+f^{*}(\sigma b). Let us extend \sigma by defining \sigma{\bf{0}}={\bf{0}}. Then \sigma is a permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. By the parameters of \mathbb{D}_{f} and \mathbb{D}_{g}, we have g^{*}({\bf{0}})=f^{*}({\bf{0}}). Since \sigma{\bf{0}}={\bf{0}} and g^{*}( {\bf{0}})=f^{*}({\bf{0}}), then for any x \in D_{g},

Therefore for any b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and x \in D_{g}, we have

Plugging x= {\bf{0}} into Eq. (?), for any b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, we have

Adding Eqs. (?) and (?), for any b \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and x \in D_{g}, we have

For any b, b' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and x \in D_{g}, by Eq. (?), we have

Let E_{f}=D_{f}+\pi {\bf{0}}. By the proof of Theorem 5, E_{f} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Hence, Eq. (?) implies that \sigma(b+b')=\sigma b+\sigma b' for any b, b' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, that is, \sigma is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Denote \sigma x=xA for A \in \operatorname{GL}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2}) and c \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. By Eq. (?), for any x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. we have

Thus g and f are affine equivalent with g(x)=f(\pi {\bf{0}}+x(A^{-1})^{T})).

This completes this proof.

Since the number of non-isomorphic TSDP designs with parameters (\dag) grows exponentially when m grows to infinity (see [K1]), it is only to show that if there are two non-isomorphic designs \mathbb{D}_1, \mathbb{D}_2, then there exist two bent functions f, g such that they are not affine equivalent.

Suppose that f and g are affine equivalent. By Theorem 7, \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_f} and \widetilde{\mathcal{C}}_{D_g} are equivalent. By Theorem 5, \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_f} and \mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_g} are equivalent. By Theorem 2, the two addition designs \mathbb{AD}_f and \mathbb{AD}_g are both TSDP. This completes the proof by using Theorem 7.

(i). If \textbf{0} \notin S_{f}, then for f'(x)=f(x)+x \cdot a with a \in S_{f}, we have \textbf{0} \in S_{f'} since W_{f'}(\textbf{0})=W_{f}(a). By Theorem 4, \mathbb{AD}_{f} and \mathbb{AD}_{f'} are isomorphic. Therefore, we may assume that \textbf{0} \in S_{f}. Let (\sigma,\pi)\in\mbox{Aut}(\mathbb{AD}_f).

Then

for all x\in\mathbb{F}_2^m and y\in S_{f}. By plugging x=\textbf{0} into (?), we obtain f(\mathbf{0})+f(\pi\mathbf{0})+\pi\mathbf{0}\cdot \sigma y=g(y)+g(\sigma y) for all y\in S_f. By plugging y=\mathbf{0} into (?), we obtain f(x)+f(\pi x)+\pi x\cdot\sigma \mathbf{0}=g(\mathbf{0})+g(\sigma \mathbf{0}) for all x\in\mathbb{F}_2^m. By the above three equations, we obtain f(\mathbf{0})+f(\pi\mathbf{0})+x\cdot y+(\pi x+\pi{\mathbf{0}})\cdot(\sigma y+\sigma\mathbf{0})+\pi\mathbf{0}\cdot\sigma\mathbf{0}=g(\mathbf{0})+g(\sigma\mathbf{0}) for all x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \text{ and } y \in S_{f}, from which we have f(\mathbf{0})+f(\pi\mathbf{0})+\pi\mathbf{0}\cdot\sigma\mathbf{0}=g(\mathbf{0})+g(\sigma\mathbf{0}) by putting x=\mathbf{0}. This implies that

for all x\in\mathbb{F}_2^m and y\in S_f, where \bar{\pi}x=\pi x+\pi\mathbf{0}, \bar{\sigma}y=\sigma y+\sigma\mathbf{0}. Since S_{f} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, by (?), it is easy to check that \bar{\pi}x, \bar{\sigma}x\in\operatorname{GL}_m({\mathbb F}_2). Then \bar{\pi}x=xA and \bar{\sigma}x=xB for some A,B\in\operatorname{GL}_m({\mathbb F}_2), and x\cdot y=\bar{\pi}x\cdot\bar{\sigma}y=(xAB^T)\cdot y for all x\in{\mathbb F}^m_2 and y \in S_{f}. So x(I_m+AB^T)\cdot y=0, where I_m is the identity matrix of size m. As S_{f} contains a basis of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, AB^T=I_m. It follows that \pi x=xA+\pi{\bf{0}} and \sigma x=x(A^T)^{-1}+\sigma{\bf{0}}. Consequently, we have

This shows that [A, \pi{\bf{0}}, \sigma{\bf{0}}A^{T}, \pi{\bf{0}}\cdot \sigma{\bf{0}}+g({\bf{0}})+g(\sigma{\bf{0}})] \in \operatorname{GB}_m({\mathbb F}_2)_f. Thus the correspondence

gives an isomorphism from \mbox{Aut} (\mathbb{AD}_f) to \mbox{Aut}(f).

(ii). We first prove that the set H of affine permutations \sigma of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} such that f(x)+f(\sigma x) is an affine function forms a group. Obviously the identity element is in H. If \sigma_{1}, \sigma_{2} \in H, then f(x)+f(\sigma_{1}x)={a_{1} \cdot x+a_{2}}, f(x)+f(\sigma_{2}x)={b_{1} \cdot x+b_{2}} for some a_{1}, b_{1} \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and a_{2}, b_{2}\in \mathbb{F}_{2}. We have

is an affine function. Thus H is a group.

If \sigma \in \mbox{Aut}(\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_{f}}), then by the proof of [EP, Theorem 9], \sigma is an affine permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and f(x)=f(\sigma x)+b' \cdot \sigma x +\varepsilon' for some b' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and \varepsilon' \in \mathbb{F}_{2}. Denote \sigma x=xA+p for some A \in \mathrm{GL}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2}) and p \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Then f(x)=f(xA+p)+b' A^{T} \cdot x+b' \cdot p+\varepsilon' and [A, p, b'A^{T}, b' \cdot p+\varepsilon'] \in \mathrm{GB}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2})_{f}. If [A, p, b, \varepsilon] \in \mathrm{GB}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2})_{f}, then f(x)=f(xA+p)+b \cdot x+\varepsilon=f(\sigma x)+b (A^{T})^{-1} \cdot \sigma x+b (A^{T})^{-1} \cdot p+\varepsilon, where \sigma x=xA+p. Since \sigma is an affine function of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, then u \cdot \sigma x is an affine Boolean function for any u \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, and thus u \cdot \sigma x=\pi u \cdot x+\varepsilon_{u} for some \pi u \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} and \varepsilon_{u} \in \mathbb{F}_{2}. If \pi u=\pi u', then (u+u') \cdot \sigma x=\varepsilon_{u}+\varepsilon_{u'} is a constant function. Since \sigma is a permutation, we obtain u=u' (otherwise, (u+u') \cdot \sigma x is balanced). Thus \pi is a permutation of \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, and u \cdot x=\pi^{-1}(u) \cdot \sigma x+\varepsilon_{\pi^{-1}(u)} for any u \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}. Therefore \sigma \in \mbox{Aut}(\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_{f}}). By the above arguments, \mbox{Aut}(\mathcal{C}_{\mathbb{AD}_{f}}) =\{\sigma: \sigma x=xA+p, x \in \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}, \text{ where } [A, p, b, \varepsilon] \in \mathrm{GB}_{m}(\mathbb{F}_{2})_{f} \text{ for some } (b, \varepsilon)\in\mathbb{F}^m_2\times\mathbb{F}_2\} =\{\sigma \text{ is an affine permutation of } \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}: f(x)+f(\sigma x) \text{ is an affine Boolean function ofF^m_2}\}.

(iii). By the proof of Theorem 5, it is easy to see that \mbox{Aut}(\widetilde{{\mathcal{C}}}_{D_f})=\{\pi|_{D_{f}}: \pi \text{ is an affine permutation over } \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \text{ with } f(x)=f(\pi x)\}.

(iv). By the proof of Theorem 7, \mbox{Aut}(\mathbb{D}_f)=\{(\pi |_{D_{f}}, (\bar{\pi}^{-1})^{*}|_{{\mathbb{F}_{2}^{m}}^{*}}): \pi \text{ is an affine permutation over } \mathbb{F}_{2}^{m} \text{ with } f(x)=f(\pi x)\}, where \bar{\pi} x=\pi x+\pi {\bf{0}}, and (\bar{\pi}^{-1})^{*} is the adjoint permutation of \bar{\pi}^{-1}.

By Proposition 2 and Theorem 8, \mbox{Aut}(\mathbb{TD}_f), \mbox{Aut}(\mathbb{AD}_f) and \mbox{Aut}(f) are isomorphic. It is known that the design \mathbb{AD}_f of a quadratic bent function f is the symplectic design with parameters (\dag) [MPP, Theorem 2.3] and \mbox{Aut}(\mathbb{AD}_f) is isomorphic to \operatorname{Sp}_m({\mathbb{F}_2})\rtimes\mathbb{F}^m_2 [K].

(i). For any b\in\mathbb{F}^{m*}_2, we have that

and for any two distinct points p,q\in\mathbb{F}^{m*}_2, we have

The parameters are evaluated by those three values of summations using Corollary 1.

(ii). (\Longleftarrow): Assume that f is quadratic. We can write as f(p+b)+f(p)+f(b)=p\cdot\pi b+g(b) for some function \pi from \mathbb{F}_2^m to itself and Boolean function g\in\mathcal{BF}_m. By plugging p={\bf{0}}, we obtain 0=f({\bf{0}})=g(b). It follows that

for all p,b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2. Due to the proof of Proposition 2 (i) \Longrightarrow (ii), we can obtain that \pi is a linear permutation of {\mathbb F}^m_2, and the result follows.

(\Longrightarrow): Assume that f(p+b)+f(p)+f(b)=p\cdot\pi b for some permutation \pi of \mathbb{F}_2^{m*} such that if we extend \pi to \mathbb{F}^m_2 with \pi({\bf{0}})={\bf{0}}, then \pi is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}^m_2. We define the Boolean function g in \mathcal{BF}_{2m} as

for all x,y\in\mathbb{F}_2^{m*}. Then g(p,b)=0 for all p,b\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 by assumptions, and so the Boolean g is identically zero, namely g\equiv 0. Then f is quadratic using Eq. (?) and this proves the first part.

For the second part, assume that the 2-design in Remark 1 and Theorem 9 are isomorphic for some bent function f. That is, f(\mathbf{0})=0 and f(p+b)+f(p)+f(b)=\sigma p\cdot\pi b for all p,b\in\mathbb{F}_2^{m*} and some permutations \sigma and \pi of \mathbb{F}_2^{m*}. By letting \sigma\mathbf{0}=\pi\mathbf{0}=\mathbf{0}, we may extend the relation to for any p,b\in\mathbb{F}_2^m and permutation maps \sigma and \pi of \mathbb{F}_2^m. Therefore two designs \mathbb{D}_1=(\mathbb{F}_2^m,{B^{f_b}:b\in \mathbb{F}_2^m}) associated with Boolean functions f_b(p)=f(b)+f(p)+f(b+p) and \mathbb{D}_2=(\mathbb{F}_2^m,{B^{g_b}:b\in \mathbb{F}_2^m}) associated with Boolean functions g_b(p)=b\cdot p are isomorphic. Observe that f_b(p)=g_{\pi b}(\sigma p). Assume that the translation design derived from a bent function f is not a TSDP design. Choose three distinct b_1,b_2,b_3\in\mathbb{F}_2^m so that there does not exist b_4\in \mathbb{F}_2^m such that f_{b_1}(p)+f_{b_2}(p)+f_{b_3}(p)\fallingdotseq f_{b_4}(x). However,

which leads to a contradiction.

(i) \Longrightarrow (ii): Since (f(x+y))_{x,y\in\mathbb{F}^m_2} is the point-block incidence matrix of 2-rank m+2 with the same parameters (\dag), by Lemma 3, we have (f(x+y))_{x,y\in\mathbb{F}^m_2}=(g(\sigma x)+g^*(\pi y)+\sigma x\cdot \pi y)_{x,y\in\mathbb{F}^m_2} for some bent function g in \mathcal{BF}_m and some permutations \sigma, \pi of \mathbb{F}^m_2. Then B_f(x,y)=f(x+y)+f(x+{\bf{0}})+f({\bf{0}}+y)+f({\bf{0}})=\bar{\sigma} x\cdot\bar{\pi}y for all x,y\in\mathbb{F}^m_2, where \bar{\sigma}x=\sigma x+\sigma{\bf{0}} and \bar{\pi}x=\pi x+\pi{\bf{0}}. This proves the first part of (ii). Assume, to the contrary, that f\circ\bar{\sigma}^{-1} is affine. Since f(x)=g(\sigma x)+g^*(\pi {\bf{0}})+\sigma x\cdot\pi{\bf{0}} for all x\in\mathbb{F}^m_2, then f(x)=g(\bar{\sigma} x+\sigma{\bf{0}})+g^*(\pi {\bf{0}})+(\bar{\sigma} x+\sigma{\bf{0}})\cdot\pi{\bf{0}}, and so f\circ\bar{\sigma}^{-1}(x)=g(x+\sigma{\bf{0}})+g^*(\pi {\bf{0}})+(x+\sigma{\bf{0}})\cdot\pi{\bf{0}}. Thus g is affine, which is a contradiction. The same argument shows that f\circ\pi^{-1} is also non-affine.

(ii) \Longrightarrow (i): By assumption, the derivative D_yf(x):=f(x+y)+f(x) in direction y\in\mathbb{F}^{m}_2 is D_yf(x)=f(y)+f({\bf{0}})+\sigma x\cdot \pi y, which is balanced for all y\in\mathbb{F}^{m*}_2 by noting \sigma{\bf{0}}=\pi{\bf{0}}=\bf{0}. Thus f is bent [C1, Theorem 12], [WFQ]. We have

By our assumptions, the dimension of the \mathbb{F}_2-linear span of \{(f(p),\sigma p,1):p\in\mathbb{F}^n_2\} is m+2 and the rank of G is m+2 by using Lemma 2. Now the same arguments in Lemma 6 (iii) \Longleftrightarrow (iv) can be applied to complete our proof by using Lemma 1.

(i) \Longleftrightarrow (iii): It follows from Proposition 2. (i) \Longrightarrow (ii): It follows from Lemma 7. (ii) \Longrightarrow (i): Since \sigma is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}^m_2 and f is bent [WFQ, Theorem 3.8], then f\circ\sigma^{-1} is non-affine. By Lemmas 3 and 7, the result follows.

(i). Let g and h be bent functions in \mathcal{BF}_m satisfying that g+h is bent and (g+h)^*=g^*+h^*. We have

It follows that for b\in\mathbb{F}^{m}_2,

and for two distinct points p,q\in\mathbb{F}^m_2,

The parameters are computed by those three values of summations using Corollary 1.

(ii). Assume, to the contrary, that \mathbb{D}_{g,h} and \mathbb{AD}_f are isomorphic. Then

and for some permutations \sigma, \pi of \mathbb{F}^m_2.

By plugging b={\bf{0}} and p={\bf{0}} into Eq. (?), respectively,

for all p,b\in{\mathbb F}^m_2. By adding Eqs. (?), (?) and (?), we have

for all p,b\in{\mathbb F}^m_2, where \bar{\sigma}p=\sigma p+\sigma{\bf{0}} and \bar{\pi}b=\pi b+\pi{\bf{0}}. By plugging b={\bf{0}} into Eq. (?), we have \bar{\sigma}p\cdot\bar{\pi}b=h(p+b)+h(p)+h(b)+h({\bf{0}})=B_h(b,p) for all p,b\in{\mathbb F}^m_2. Since B_h(b,p)=B_h(p,b), then \tau:=\bar{\pi}\circ\bar{\sigma}^{-1} is a linear permutation of \mathbb{F}^m_2. From Eq. (?), we have

for all p,b\in{\mathbb F}^m_2, where \tau^* is the adjoint permutation of \tau. We claim that both h\circ \bar{\sigma}^{-1} and h\circ \bar{\pi}^{-1} are non-affine. To get a contradiction, we may assume that h\circ \bar{\pi}^{-1} is affine, and so h\circ \bar{\pi}^{-1}(p)=a\cdot p+\varepsilon for some a\in\mathbb{F}^m_2 and \varepsilon\in\mathbb{F}_2. By Eq. (?), we have

which contradicts that h is bent. This proves our claim. It then follows from Lemma 7 that the 2-rank of \mathbb{TD}_h is m+2, which is a contradiction to our assumption.