1,145 research outputs found

    Proofs of proximity for context-free languages and read-once branching programs

    Get PDF
    Proofs of proximity are probabilistic proof systems in which the verifier only queries a sub-linear number of input bits, and soundness only means that, with high probability, the input is close to an accepting input. In their minimal form, called Merlin-Arthur proofs of proximity ( MAP ), the verifier receives, in addition to query access to the input, also free access to an explicitly given short (sub-linear) proof. A more general notion is that of an interactive proof of proximity ( IPP ), in which the verifier is allowed to interact with an all-powerful, yet untrusted, prover. MAP s and IPP s may be thought of as the NP and IP analogues of property testing, respectively

    An exponential separation between MA and AM proofs of proximity

    Get PDF
    Interactive proofs of proximity allow a sublinear-time verifier to check that a given input is close to the language, using a small amount of communication with a powerful (but untrusted) prover. In this work we consider two natural minimally interactive variants of such proofs systems, in which the prover only sends a single message, referred to as the proof. The first variant, known as MA-proofs of Proximity (MAP), is fully non-interactive, meaning that the proof is a function of the input only. The second variant, known as AM-proofs of Proximity (AMP), allows the proof to additionally depend on the verifier's (entire) random string. The complexity of both MAPs and AMPs is the total number of bits that the verifier observes - namely, the sum of the proof length and query complexity. Our main result is an exponential separation between the power of MAPs and AMPs. Specifically, we exhibit an explicit and natural property Pi that admits an AMP with complexity O(log n), whereas any MAP for Pi has complexity Omega~(n^{1/4}), where n denotes the length of the input in bits. Our MAP lower bound also yields an alternate proof, which is more general and arguably much simpler, for a recent result of Fischer et al. (ITCS, 2014). Lastly, we also consider the notion of oblivious proofs of proximity, in which the verifier's queries are oblivious to the proof. In this setting we show that AMPs can only be quadratically stronger than MAPs. As an application of this result, we show an exponential separation between the power of public and private coin for oblivious interactive proofs of proximity

    Efficient Batch Verification for UP

    Get PDF
    Consider a setting in which a prover wants to convince a verifier of the correctness of k NP statements. For example, the prover wants to convince the verifier that k given integers N_1,...,N_k are all RSA moduli (i.e., products of equal length primes). Clearly this problem can be solved by simply having the prover send the k NP witnesses, but this involves a lot of communication. Can interaction help? In particular, is it possible to construct interactive proofs for this task whose communication grows sub-linearly with k? Our main result is such an interactive proof for verifying the correctness of any k UP statements (i.e., NP statements that have a unique witness). The proof-system uses only a constant number of rounds and the communication complexity is k^delta * poly(m), where delta>0 is an arbitrarily small constant, m is the length of a single witness, and the poly term refers to a fixed polynomial that only depends on the language and not on delta. The (honest) prover strategy can be implemented in polynomial-time given access to the k (unique) witnesses. Our proof leverages "interactive witness verification" (IWV), a new type of proof-system that may be of independent interest. An IWV is a proof-system in which the verifier needs to verify the correctness of an NP statement using: (i) a sublinear number of queries to an alleged NP witness, and (ii) a short interaction with a powerful but untrusted prover. In contrast to the setting of PCPs and Interactive PCPs, here the verifier only has access to the raw NP witness, rather than some encoding thereof

    Zero-Knowledge Proofs of Proximity

    Get PDF
    Interactive proofs of proximity (IPPs) are interactive proofs in which the verifier runs in time sub-linear in the input length. Since the verifier cannot even read the entire input, following the property testing literature, we only require that the verifier reject inputs that are far from the language (and, as usual, accept inputs that are in the language). In this work, we initiate the study of zero-knowledge proofs of proximity (ZKPP). A ZKPP convinces a sub-linear time verifier that the input is close to the language (similarly to an IPP) while simultaneously guaranteeing a natural zero-knowledge property. Specifically, the verifier learns nothing beyond (1) the fact that the input is in the language, and (2) what it could additionally infer by reading a few bits of the input. Our main focus is the setting of statistical zero-knowledge where we show that the following hold unconditionally (where N denotes the input length): - Statistical ZKPPs can be sub-exponentially more efficient than property testers (or even non-interactive IPPs): We show a natural property which has a statistical ZKPP with a polylog(N) time verifier, but requires Omega(sqrt(N)) queries (and hence also runtime) for every property tester. - Statistical ZKPPs can be sub-exponentially less efficient than IPPs: We show a property which has an IPP with a polylog(N) time verifier, but cannot have a statistical ZKPP with even an N^(o(1)) time verifier. - Statistical ZKPPs for some graph-based properties such as promise versions of expansion and bipartiteness, in the bounded degree graph model, with polylog(N) time verifiers exist. Lastly, we also consider the computational setting where we show that: - Assuming the existence of one-way functions, every language computable either in (logspace uniform) NC or in SC, has a computational ZKPP with a (roughly) sqrt(N) time verifier. - Assuming the existence of collision-resistant hash functions, every language in NP has a statistical zero-knowledge argument of proximity with a polylog(N) time verifier

    Dagstuhl News January - December 2001

    Get PDF
    "Dagstuhl News" is a publication edited especially for the members of the Foundation "Informatikzentrum Schloss Dagstuhl" to thank them for their support. The News give a summary of the scientific work being done in Dagstuhl. Each Dagstuhl Seminar is presented by a small abstract describing the contents and scientific highlights of the seminar as well as the perspectives or challenges of the research topic

    Principles of Security and Trust: 7th International Conference, POST 2018, Held as Part of the European Joint Conferences on Theory and Practice of Software, ETAPS 2018, Thessaloniki, Greece, April 14-20, 2018, Proceedings

    Get PDF
    authentication; computer science; computer software selection and evaluation; cryptography; data privacy; formal logic; formal methods; formal specification; internet; privacy; program compilers; programming languages; security analysis; security systems; semantics; separation logic; software engineering; specifications; verification; world wide we

    Automated Reasoning

    Get PDF
    This volume, LNAI 13385, constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, IJCAR 2022, held in Haifa, Israel, in August 2022. The 32 full research papers and 9 short papers presented together with two invited talks were carefully reviewed and selected from 85 submissions. The papers focus on the following topics: Satisfiability, SMT Solving,Arithmetic; Calculi and Orderings; Knowledge Representation and Jutsification; Choices, Invariance, Substitutions and Formalization; Modal Logics; Proofs System and Proofs Search; Evolution, Termination and Decision Prolems. This is an open access book

    A Hierarchy Theorem for Interactive Proofs of Proximity

    Get PDF
    The number of rounds, or round complexity, used in an interactive protocol is a fundamental resource. In this work we consider the significance of round complexity in the context of Interactive Proofs of Proximity (IPPs). Roughly speaking, IPPs are interactive proofs in which the verifier runs in sublinear time and is only required to reject inputs that are far from the language. Our main result is a round hierarchy theorem for IPPs, showing that the power of IPPs grows with the number of rounds. More specifically, we show that there exists a gap function g(r) = Theta(r^2) such that for every constant r geq 1 there exists a language that (1) has a g(r)-round IPP with verification time t=t(n,r) but (2) does not have an r-round IPP with verification time t (or even verification time t\u27=poly(t)). In fact, we prove a stronger result by exhibiting a single language L such that, for every constant r geq 1, there is an O(r^2)-round IPP for L with t=n^{O(1/r)} verification time, whereas the verifier in any r-round IPP for L must run in time at least t^{100}. Moreover, we show an IPP for L with a poly-logarithmic number of rounds and only poly-logarithmic erification time, yielding a sub-exponential separation between the power of constant-round IPPs versus general (unbounded round) IPPs. From our hierarchy theorem we also derive implications to standard interactive proofs (in which the verifier can run in polynomial time). Specifically, we show that the round reduction technique of Babai and Moran (JCSS, 1988) is (almost) optimal among all blackbox transformations, and we show a connection to the algebrization framework of Aaronson and Wigderson (TOCT, 2009)
    • …
    corecore