Languages that are easier than their proofs

Authors:
Richard Beigel;Mihir Bellare;Joan Feigenbaum;Shafi Goldwasser
Affiliations:
-;-;-;-
Venue:
SFCS '91 Proceedings of the 32nd annual symposium on Foundations of computer science
Year:
1991

Citing 0
Cited 4

Making zero-knowledge provers efficient

STOC '92 Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Delegating computation: interactive proofs for muggles

STOC '08 Proceedings of the fortieth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
A (de)constructive approach to program checking

STOC '08 Proceedings of the fortieth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Structural complexity of multiobjective NP search problems

LATIN'12 Proceedings of the 10th Latin American international conference on Theoretical Informatics

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Languages in NP are presented for which it is harder to prove membership interactively than it is to decide this membership. Similarly, languages where checking is harder than computing membership are presented. Under assumptions about triple-exponential time, incoherent sets in NP are constructed. Without any assumptions, incoherent sets are constructed in DSPACE (n to the log n), yielding the first uncheckable and non-random-self-reducible sets in that space.