Multi-prover interactive proofs: how to remove intractability assumptions
STOC '88 Proceedings of the twentieth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
The knowledge complexity of interactive proof systems
SIAM Journal on Computing
Designing programs that check their work
STOC '89 Proceedings of the twenty-first annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Self-testing/correcting with applications to numerical problems
STOC '90 Proceedings of the twenty-second annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Self-testing/correcting for polynomials and for approximate functions
STOC '91 Proceedings of the twenty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing
Efficient Identification Schemes Using Two Prover Interactive Proofs
CRYPTO '89 Proceedings of the 9th Annual International Cryptology Conference on Advances in Cryptology
Algebraic methods for interactive proof systems
SFCS '90 Proceedings of the 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
Nondeterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols
SFCS '90 Proceedings of the 31st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Recent results in interactive proof systems [12][13] [1] seem to indicate that it is easier for a prover in a single prover interactive proof system to cheat the verifier than it is for a prover in a multiple prover interactive proof system. We show that this is not the case for a single prover in which all but a fixed polynomial of the prover's space is erased between each round. One consequence of this is that any multiple prover interactive protocol in which the provers need only a polynomial amount of space can be easily transformed into a single prover interactive protocol where the prover has only a fixed polynomial amount of space. This result also shows that one can easily transform checkers [5] into adaptive checkers [7] under the assumption that the program being checked has space bounded by a fixed polynomial.