TY - GEN
T1 - Non-interactive proofs of proximity [extended abstract]
AU - Gur, Tom
AU - Rothblum, Ron D.
PY - 2015/1/11
Y1 - 2015/1/11
N2 - We initiate a study of non-interactive proofs of proximity. These proof-systems consist of a verifier that wishes to ascertain the validity of a given statement, using a short (sublinear length) explicitly given proof, and a sublinear number of queries to its input. Since the verifier cannot even read the entire input, we only require it to reject inputs that are far from being valid. Thus, the verifier is only assured of the proximity of the statement to a correct one. Such proofsystems can be viewed as the NP (or more accurately MA) analogue of property testing. We explore both the power and limitations of non interactive proofs of proximity. We show that such proof-systems can be exponentially stronger than property testers, but are exponentially weaker than the interactive proofs of proximity studied by Rothblum, Vadhan and Wigderson (STOC 2013). In addition, we show a natural problem that has a full and (almost) tight multiplicative trade-off between the length of the proof and the verifier's query complexity. On the negative side, we also show that there exist properties for which even a linearly-long (non-interactive) proof of proximity cannot significantly reduce the query complexity.
AB - We initiate a study of non-interactive proofs of proximity. These proof-systems consist of a verifier that wishes to ascertain the validity of a given statement, using a short (sublinear length) explicitly given proof, and a sublinear number of queries to its input. Since the verifier cannot even read the entire input, we only require it to reject inputs that are far from being valid. Thus, the verifier is only assured of the proximity of the statement to a correct one. Such proofsystems can be viewed as the NP (or more accurately MA) analogue of property testing. We explore both the power and limitations of non interactive proofs of proximity. We show that such proof-systems can be exponentially stronger than property testers, but are exponentially weaker than the interactive proofs of proximity studied by Rothblum, Vadhan and Wigderson (STOC 2013). In addition, we show a natural problem that has a full and (almost) tight multiplicative trade-off between the length of the proof and the verifier's query complexity. On the negative side, we also show that there exist properties for which even a linearly-long (non-interactive) proof of proximity cannot significantly reduce the query complexity.
KW - Probabilistic proof systems
KW - Property testing
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84922118761&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1145/2688073.2688079
DO - 10.1145/2688073.2688079
M3 - منشور من مؤتمر
T3 - ITCS 2015 - Proceedings of the 6th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science
SP - 133
EP - 142
BT - ITCS 2015 - Proceedings of the 6th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science
T2 - 6th Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, ITCS 2015
Y2 - 11 January 2015 through 13 January 2015
ER -