### Table 2: Zero-knowledge subproofs and their communication complexity.

"... In PAGE 12: ... also developed a ZK watermark detection protocol for ST-DM in [23]. 3 Zero-Knowledge Subproofs The proofs that are employed in the previous zero-knowledge detectors and in the Generalized Gaussian one are shown in Table2 with their respective communication complexity, which has been calculated... ..."

### TABLE I MICROBENCHMARK RESULTS FOR ZERO-KNOWLEDGE CLIENT PUZZLES.

### Table 4.1: Three private set protocols compared in different security settings. ROM stands for Random Oracle Model , NIZK for Non-Interactive Zero Knowledge , and UC for Universally Composable .

2006

### Table 1: Comparison of some public-key algorithms.

"... In PAGE 6: ... Recent zero-knowledge identi cation scheme such as the Fiat-Shamir (FS) (see [Sim92]) or the Guillou-Quisquater (GQ) [GQ90] schemes are much more suited for smart cards applications. Table1 compares the dif- ferent characteristics of these algorithms in terms of speed, amount of bits exchanged between the terminal and the card, size of the RAM for interme- diate computations and size of the non-volatile memories.... ..."

### Table 1. Honest veri er Zero-Knowledge-Proof Proof9LOGEQ Theorem 1 (following [Scho93]) The protocol in table 1 is a witness indis- tinguishable proof of knowledge of xi satisfying yi xi (mod p) and z xi (mod p) for some i 2 [1 : n]: Proof 1: 1. Completeness: The following equivalences hold by construction of the proof: i = 1 : s1 x1c1+k1 yc1 1 r1 (mod p); s1 x1c1+k1 zc1t1 (mod p); i 2 : si ki yci i kiy?ci i

### Table 1. Running time and size of communication on a 2.53GMz Intel Pentium 4 running RedHat Linux. Security parameters are lscript = 32, p = 1024 bits, and q = 160 bits.

2005

"... In PAGE 17: ...AM running RedHat Linux 9.0. We simulate the certificate holder and service provider on the same machine. With p of size 1024 bits and q of size 160 bits in the Pedersen commitment scheme, and lscript = 32, the performance of two zero-knowledge proof proto- cols and two OCBE protocols is summarized in Table1 . We compare the performance of GE-ZK and GE-OCBE on different attribute sizes in Table 2, lscript = 32 is roughly two-times expensive as lscript = 16.... ..."

Cited by 10

### Table 1: Measures on the intersection example The results of the experimentation are given in table 1. In this domain and the domains presented in [Tor95], the e ects of language biases appeared as very extreme. [Tor95] suggest some strategy to exploit this observation.

### Table 4 Classification of software inspection methods (adapted from Siy 1996, p. 18)

1999

### Table 4. Random poles

"... In PAGE 11: ...3. Table4 gives some timings for computing the nodes and weights in the case of arbitrary poles k = 1=(2~ k 1), where the points ~ k are randomly chosen from a uniform distribution on [0; 1]. In fact, with this knowledge we could use the exact asymptotic zero distribution to obtain the initial values, but we do not do this and use the procedure based on the spline approximation.... ..."

Cited by 2

### Table 5: Compute time in CPU seconds objects atts AODE NB TAN LBR J48

2002

"... In PAGE 5: ... 6.2 Relative Compute Time Table5 presents the total compute time of each algorithm by data set. These times are the total time to run Weka to complete the cross-validation task and hence include data input as well as learning and classification.... ..."

Cited by 7