skip to main content
research-article

Input-Oblivious Proof Systems and a Uniform Complexity Perspective on P/poly

Published:31 August 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

An input-oblivious proof system is a proof system in which the proof does not depend on the claim being proved. Input-oblivious versions of NP and MA were introduced in passing by Fortnow, Santhanam, and Williams, who also showed that those classes are related to questions on circuit complexity.

In this article, we wish to highlight the notion of input-oblivious proof systems and initiate a more systematic study of them. We begin by describing in detail the results of Fortnow et al. and discussing their connection to circuit complexity. We then extend the study to input-oblivious versions of IP, and PCP, and ZK and present few preliminary results regarding those versions.

References

  1. S. Aaronson. 2007. The learnability of quantum states. In Proceedings of the Royal Society 463, 2088, 3089--3114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. S. Arora, C. Lund, R. Motwani, M. Sudan, and M. Szegedy. 1998. Proof verification and the hardness of approximation problems. Journal of the ACM 45, 501--555. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Arora and S. Safra. 1998. Probabilistic checkable proofs: A new characterization of NP. Journal of the ACM 45, 70--122. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. V. Arvind, J. Köbler, and R. Schuler. 1995. On helping and interactive proof systems. International Journal of Foundations of Computer Science 6, 2, 137--153.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. L. Babai, L. Fortnow, and C. Lund. 1991. Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols. Computational Complexity 1, 3--40. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. R. V. Book. 1974. Tally languages and complexity classes. Information and Control 26, 2, 186--193.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. V. T. Chakaravarthy and S. Roy. 2006. Oblivious symmetric alternation. In STACS 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3884. Springer, 230--241. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Fortnow, R. Santhanam, and R. Williams. 2009. Fixed-polynomial size circuit bounds. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC’09). 19--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. O. Goldreich. 2001. Foundation of Cryptography—Basic Tools. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. O. Goldreich. 2008. Computational Complexity: A Conceptual Perspective. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. O. Goldreich and A. Wigderson. 1997. Tiny families of functions with random properties: A quality-size trade-off for hashing. Journal of Random Structures and Algorithms 11, 4, 315--343. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. R. Impagliazzo, V. Kabanets, and A. Wigderson. 2001. In search of an easy witness: Exponential time vs. probabilistic polynomial time. In Proceedings of the 16th IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity. 2--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. R. M. Karp and R. J. Lipton. 1980. Some connections between nonuniform and uniform complexity classes. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’80). 302--309. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. K.-I. Ko. 1987. On helping by robust oracle machines. Theoretical Computer Science 52, 15--36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. H. Krawczyk. 1994. LFSR-based hashing and authentication. In Advances in Cryptology—CRYPTO’94. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 839. Springer, 129--139. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. H. Krawczyk. 1995. New hash functions for message authentication. In Advances in Cryptology—EUROCRYPT’95. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 921. Springer, 301--310. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. C. Lautemann. 1993. BPP and the polynomial hierarchy. Information Processing Letters 17, 4, 215--217.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. C. Lund, L. Fortnow, H. Karloff, and N. Nisan. 1992. Algebraic methods for interactive proof systems. Journal of the ACM 39, 4, 859--868. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Shamir. 1992. IP = PSPACE. Journal of the ACM 39, 4, 869--877. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. A. Srinivasan and D. Zuckerman. 1999. Computing with very weak random sources. SIAM Journal on Computing 28, 4, 1433--1459. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. U. Schöning. 1980. Robust algorithms: A different approach to oracles. Theoretical Computer Science 40, 57--66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. U. Schöning. 1988. Robust oracle machines. In Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science 1988. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 324. Springer, 93--106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Input-Oblivious Proof Systems and a Uniform Complexity Perspective on P/poly

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Computation Theory
          ACM Transactions on Computation Theory  Volume 7, Issue 4
          September 2015
          110 pages
          ISSN:1942-3454
          EISSN:1942-3462
          DOI:10.1145/2818749
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 31 August 2015
          • Accepted: 1 May 2015
          • Received: 1 April 2014
          Published in toct Volume 7, Issue 4

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader
        About Cookies On This Site

        We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

        Learn more

        Got it!