Results 1  10
of
20,404
The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems

, 1989
"... Usually, a proof of a theorem contains more knowledge than the mere fact that the theorem is true. For instance, to prove that a graph is Hamiltonian it suffices to exhibit a Hamiltonian tour in it; however, this seems to contain more knowledge than the single bit Hamiltonian/nonHamiltonian. In th ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1246 (39 self)
 Add to MetaCart
/nonHamiltonian. In this paper a computational complexity theory of the "knowledge " contained in a proof is developed. Zeroknowledge proofs are defined as those proofs that convey no additional knowledge other than the correctness of the proposition in question. Examples of zeroknowledge proof systems are given
Algebraic Methods for Interactive Proof Systems
, 1990
"... We present a new algebraic technique for the construction of interactive proof systems. We use our technique to prove that every language in the polynomialtime hierarchy has an interactive proof system. This technique played a pivotal role in the recent proofs that IP=PSPACE (Shamir) and that MIP ..."
Abstract

Cited by 338 (28 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We present a new algebraic technique for the construction of interactive proof systems. We use our technique to prove that every language in the polynomialtime hierarchy has an interactive proof system. This technique played a pivotal role in the recent proofs that IP=PSPACE (Shamir
Proofs that Yield Nothing but Their Validity or All Languages in NP Have ZeroKnowledge Proof Systems
 JOURNAL OF THE ACM
, 1991
"... In this paper the generality and wide applicability of Zeroknowledge proofs, a notion introduced by Goldwasser, Micali, and Rackoff is demonstrated. These are probabilistic and interactive proofs that, for the members of a language, efficiently demonstrate membership in the language without convey ..."
Abstract

Cited by 427 (43 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper the generality and wide applicability of Zeroknowledge proofs, a notion introduced by Goldwasser, Micali, and Rackoff is demonstrated. These are probabilistic and interactive proofs that, for the members of a language, efficiently demonstrate membership in the language without
Proof Systems for . . .
, 2008
"... We survey the wide range of proof systems proposed for intuitionistic logic, emphasising the differences and their design for different purposes, ranging from ease of philosophical or other semantic justification through programming language semantics to automated reasoning. In particular we will me ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
We survey the wide range of proof systems proposed for intuitionistic logic, emphasising the differences and their design for different purposes, ranging from ease of philosophical or other semantic justification through programming language semantics to automated reasoning. In particular we
On the Composition of ZeroKnowledge Proof Systems
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 1990
"... : The wide applicability of zeroknowledge interactive proofs comes from the possibility of using these proofs as subroutines in cryptographic protocols. A basic question concerning this use is whether the (sequential and/or parallel) composition of zeroknowledge protocols is zeroknowledge too. We ..."
Abstract

Cited by 208 (15 self)
 Add to MetaCart
: The wide applicability of zeroknowledge interactive proofs comes from the possibility of using these proofs as subroutines in cryptographic protocols. A basic question concerning this use is whether the (sequential and/or parallel) composition of zeroknowledge protocols is zeroknowledge too
ProofCarrying Code
, 1997
"... This paper describes proofcarrying code (PCC), a mechanism by which a host system can determine with certainty that it is safe to execute a program supplied (possibly in binary form) by an untrusted source. For this to be possible, the untrusted code producer must supply with the code a safety proo ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1240 (27 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper describes proofcarrying code (PCC), a mechanism by which a host system can determine with certainty that it is safe to execute a program supplied (possibly in binary form) by an untrusted source. For this to be possible, the untrusted code producer must supply with the code a safety
A Taxonomy of Proof Systems
 BASIC RESEARCH IN COMPUTER SCIENCE, CENTER OF THE DANISH NATIONAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION
, 1997
"... Several alternative formulations of the concept of an efficient proof system are nowadays coexisting in our field. These systems include the classical formulation of NP , interactive proof systems (giving rise to the class IP), computationallysound proof systems, and probabilistically checkable pro ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Several alternative formulations of the concept of an efficient proof system are nowadays coexisting in our field. These systems include the classical formulation of NP , interactive proof systems (giving rise to the class IP), computationallysound proof systems, and probabilistically checkable
Small Depth Proof Systems
"... Abstract. A proof system for a language L is a function f such that Range(f) is exactly L. In this paper, we look at proof systems from a circuit complexity point of view and study proof systems that are computationally very restricted. The restriction we study is: they can be computed by bounded fa ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. A proof system for a language L is a function f such that Range(f) is exactly L. In this paper, we look at proof systems from a circuit complexity point of view and study proof systems that are computationally very restricted. The restriction we study is: they can be computed by bounded
Results 1  10
of
20,404