On the Power of Interactive Proofs for Learning

Tom Gur,Mohammad Mahdi Jahanara,Mohammad Mahdi Khodabandeh,Ninad Rajgopal,Bahar Salamatian,Igor Shinkar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/3618260.3649784

2024-04-12

Abstract:We continue the study of doubly-efficient proof systems for verifying agnostic PAC learning, for which we obtain the following results.

Computational Complexity,Data Structures and Algorithms,Machine Learning

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Practical, Provably-Correct Interactive Learning in the Realizable Setting: The Power of True Believers

Julian Katz-Samuels,Blake Mason,Kevin Jamieson,Rob Nowak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2111.04915

IF: 5.414

2021-11-09

Machine Learning

Abstract:We consider interactive learning in the realizable setting and develop a general framework to handle problems ranging from best arm identification to active classification. We begin our investigation with the observation that agnostic algorithms \emph{cannot} be minimax-optimal in the realizable setting. Hence, we design novel computationally efficient algorithms for the realizable setting that match the minimax lower bound up to logarithmic factors and are general-purpose, accommodating a wide variety of function classes including kernel methods, H{\"o}lder smooth functions, and convex functions. The sample complexities of our algorithms can be quantified in terms of well-known quantities like the extended teaching dimension and haystack dimension. However, unlike algorithms based directly on those combinatorial quantities, our algorithms are computationally efficient. To achieve computational efficiency, our algorithms sample from the version space using Monte Carlo "hit-and-run" algorithms instead of maintaining the version space explicitly. Our approach has two key strengths. First, it is simple, consisting of two unifying, greedy algorithms. Second, our algorithms have the capability to seamlessly leverage prior knowledge that is often available and useful in practice. In addition to our new theoretical results, we demonstrate empirically that our algorithms are competitive with Gaussian process UCB methods.
G T ] 9 A pr 2 01 8 Rational Proofs with Non-Cooperative Provers

J. Chen,Samuel McCauley,Shikha Singh

2018-01-01

Abstract:Interactive proofs are a fundamental theoretical concept that has become increasingly widely used as a framework to design efficient computation-outsourcing protocols. However, in all existing interactive-proof systems with multiple provers, the provers’ interests either perfectly align (as in multi-prover interactive proofs) or directly conflict (as in refereed games). Neither of these extremes truly capture the strategic nature of service providers in outsourcing applications. How to design and analyze non-cooperative interactive proofs is an important open problem. In this paper, we introduce a multi-prover interactive-proof model in which the provers are rational and non-cooperative—each prover acts individually so as to maximize his own utility in the resulting game. In contrast to refereed games, no prover is required to be honest. To model interactive protocols with non-cooperative provers, we first define a new solution concept for extensive-form games with imperfect information, strong sequential equilibrium. Our technical results focus on protocols that provide strong utility gap guarantees, which are analogous to soundness gap in classic interactive proofs. At a high level, a utility gap of u means that the protocol is robust against provers that may not care about a utility loss of 1/u. We fully characterize the complexity of our proof system under different utility gap guarantees. For example, we show that with a polynomial utility gap, the power of our proof system is exactly P. Our results imply that non-cooperative provers can be used to handle adaptive oracle queries (unlike the cooperative rational provers studied previously), which makes them more powerful whenever adaptive queries do not reduce to non-adaptive queries.
Interactive Proofs with Quantum Finite Automata

Harumichi Nishimura,Tomoyuki Yamakami

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcs.2014.11.030

2014-08-16

Abstract:Following an early work of Dwork and Stockmeyer on interactive proof systems whose verifiers are two-way probabilistic finite automata, the authors initiated in 2004 a study on the computational power of quantum interactive proof systems whose verifiers are particularly limited to quantum finite automata. As a follow-up to the authors' early journal publication [J. Comput. System Sci., vol.75, pp.255-269, 2009], we further investigate the quantum nature of interactions between provers and verifiers by studying how various restrictions on quantum interactive proof systems affect the language recognition power of the proof systems. In particular, we examine three intriguing restrictions that (i) provers always behave in a classical fashion, (ii) verifiers always reveal to provers the information on next moves, and (iii) the number of interactions between provers and verifiers is bounded.

Quantum Physics,Computational Complexity,Formal Languages and Automata Theory
A logic of interactive proofs

David Lehnherr,Zoran Ognjanovic,Thomas Studer

2023-09-27

Abstract:We introduce the probabilistic two-agent justification logic IPJ, a logic in which we can reason about agents that perform interactive proofs. In order to study the growth rate of the probabilities in IPJ, we present a new method of parametrising IPJ over certain negligible functions. Further, our approach leads to a new notion of zero-knowledge proofs.

Logic in Computer Science
Pseudo-deterministic Proofs

Shafi Goldwasser,Ofer Grossman,Dhiraj Holden

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1706.04641

2017-06-15

Abstract:We introduce pseudo-deterministic interactive proofs (psdAM): interactive proof systems for search problems where the verifier is guaranteed with high probability to output the same output on different executions. As in the case with classical interactive proofs, the verifier is a probabilistic polynomial time algorithm interacting with an untrusted powerful prover. We view pseudo-deterministic interactive proofs as an extension of the study of pseudo-deterministic randomized polynomial time algorithms: the goal of the latter is to find canonical solutions to search problems whereas the goal of the former is to prove that a solution to a search problem is canonical to a probabilistic polynomial time verifier. Alternatively, one may think of the powerful prover as aiding the probabilistic polynomial time verifier to find canonical solutions to search problems, with high probability over the randomness of the verifier. The challenge is that pseudo-determinism should hold not only with respect to the randomness, but also with respect to the prover: a malicious prover should not be able to cause the verifier to output a solution other than the unique canonical one.

Computational Complexity
Improvements on Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems Related to Quadratic Residuosity Languages.

Wei Liu,Jian Weng,Bingsheng Zhang,Kai He,Junjie Huang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2022.09.026

IF: 8.1

2022-01-01

Information Sciences

Abstract:Non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) proof systems are very useful for statement verification without interaction in cryptography; they entail just one message, called the proof, that convinces the verifier of the truth of the statement without leaking any extra information. Many NIZK proof systems are related to quadratic residuosity languages and follow three main steps. First, the prover and the verifier sample a common reference string (CRS) in some particular form. Second, the prover proves that n is a Blum integer (BL , n = p 1 t 1 · p 2 t 2, where p 1 and p 2 are different primes both congruent to 3 modulo 4, and t 1 and t 2 are odd). Third, various statements (e.g., NQR n , OR n , AND n , T ( k , t ), and 3 SAT) can be proven by the prover based on the properties of BL . In this study, we improve the NIZK proof system for n ∈ BL based on the special distribution of the square roots modulo n and embed this proof in the third step. Moreover, we show that the CRS can be sampled more efficiently using the improved process.
Neural Interactive Proofs

Lewis Hammond,Sam Adam-Day

2024-12-12

Abstract:We consider the problem of how a trusted, but computationally bounded agent (a 'verifier') can learn to interact with one or more powerful but untrusted agents ('provers') in order to solve a given task. More specifically, we study the case in which agents are represented using neural networks and refer to solutions of this problem as neural interactive proofs. First we introduce a unifying framework based on prover-verifier games, which generalises previously proposed interaction protocols. We then describe several new protocols for generating neural interactive proofs, and provide a theoretical comparison of both new and existing approaches. Finally, we support this theory with experiments in two domains: a toy graph isomorphism problem that illustrates the key ideas, and a code validation task using large language models. In so doing, we aim to create a foundation for future work on neural interactive proofs and their application in building safer AI systems.

Artificial Intelligence,Machine Learning
Trade-offs in Distributed Interactive Proofs

Pierluigi Crescenzi,Pierre Fraigniaud,Ami Paz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1908.03363

2019-08-09

Abstract:The study of interactive proofs in the context of distributed network computing is a novel topic, recently introduced by Kol, Oshman, and Saxena [PODC 2018]. In the spirit of sequential interactive proofs theory, we study the power of distributed interactive proofs. This is achieved via a series of results establishing trade-offs between various parameters impacting the power of interactive proofs, including the number of interactions, the certificate size, the communication complexity, and the form of randomness used. Our results also connect distributed interactive proofs with the established field of distributed verification. In general, our results contribute to providing structure to the landscape of distributed interactive proofs.

Distributed, Parallel, and Cluster Computing,Computational Complexity
Making $\textsf{IP}=\textsf{PSPACE}$ Practical: Efficient Interactive Protocols for BDD Algorithms

Eszter Couillard,Philipp Czerner,Javier Esparza,Rupak Majumdar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37709-9_21

2023-09-06

Abstract:We show that interactive protocols between a prover and a verifier, a well-known tool of complexity theory, can be used in practice to certify the correctness of automated reasoning tools. Theoretically, interactive protocols exist for all $\textsf{PSPACE}$ problems. The verifier of a protocol checks the prover's answer to a problem instance in probabilistic polynomial time, with polynomially many bits of communication, and with exponentially small probability of error. (The prover may need exponential time.) Existing interactive protocols are not used in practice because their provers use naive algorithms, inefficient even for small instances, that are incompatible with practical implementations of automated reasoning. We bridge the gap between theory and practice by means of an interactive protocol whose prover uses BDDs. We consider the problem of counting the number of assignments to a QBF instance ($\#\textrm{CP}$), which has a natural BDD-based algorithm. We give an interactive protocol for $\#\textrm{CP}$ whose prover is implemented on top of an extended BDD library. The prover has only a linear overhead in computation time over the natural algorithm. We have implemented our protocol in $\textsf{blic}$, a certifying tool for $\#\textrm{CP}$. Experiments on standard QBF benchmarks show that $\textsf{blic}$ is competitive with state-of-the-art QBF-solvers. The run time of the verifier is negligible. While loss of absolute certainty can be concerning, the error probability in our experiments is at most $10^{-10}$ and reduces to $10^{-10k}$ by repeating the verification $k$ times.

Logic in Computer Science,Computational Complexity
Non-Cooperative Rational Interactive Proofs

Jing Chen,Samuel McCauley,Shikha Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ESA.2019.29

2021-08-12

Abstract:Interactive-proof games model the scenario where an honest party interacts with powerful but strategic provers, to elicit from them the correct answer to a computational question. Interactive proofs are increasingly used as a framework to design protocols for computation outsourcing. Existing interactive-proof games largely fall into two categories: either as games of cooperation such as multi-prover interactive proofs and cooperative rational proofs, where the provers work together as a team; or as games of conflict such as refereed games, where the provers directly compete with each other in a zero-sum game. Neither of these extremes truly capture the strategic nature of service providers in outsourcing applications. How to design and analyze non-cooperative interactive proofs is an important open problem. In this paper, we introduce a mechanism-design approach to define a multi-prover interactive-proof model in which the provers are rational and non-cooperative---they act to maximize their expected utility given others' strategies. We define a strong notion of backwards induction as our solution concept to analyze the resulting extensive-form game with imperfect information. Our protocols provide utility gap guarantees, which are analogous to soundness gap in classic interactive proofs. At a high level, a utility gap of u means that the protocol is robust against provers that may not care about a utility loss of 1/u. We fully characterize the complexity of our proof system under different utility gap guarantees. For example, we show that with a polynomial utility gap, the power of non-cooperative rational interactive proofs is exactly P^NEXP.

Computer Science and Game Theory
Interactive proofs for verifying (quantum) learning and testing

Matthias C. Caro,Jens Eisert,Marcel Hinsche,Marios Ioannou,Alexander Nietner,Ryan Sweke

2024-10-31

Abstract:We consider the problem of testing and learning from data in the presence of resource constraints, such as limited memory or weak data access, which place limitations on the efficiency and feasibility of testing or learning. In particular, we ask the following question: Could a resource-constrained learner/tester use interaction with a resource-unconstrained but untrusted party to solve a learning or testing problem more efficiently than they could without such an interaction? In this work, we answer this question both abstractly and for concrete problems, in two complementary ways: For a wide variety of scenarios, we prove that a resource-constrained learner cannot gain any advantage through classical interaction with an untrusted prover. As a special case, we show that for the vast majority of testing and learning problems in which quantum memory is a meaningful resource, a memory-constrained quantum algorithm cannot overcome its limitations via classical communication with a memory-unconstrained quantum prover. In contrast, when quantum communication is allowed, we construct a variety of interactive proof protocols, for specific learning and testing problems, which allow memory-constrained quantum verifiers to gain significant advantages through delegation to untrusted provers. These results highlight both the limitations and potential of delegating learning and testing problems to resource-rich but untrusted third parties.

Quantum Physics,Computational Complexity,Data Structures and Algorithms,Machine Learning
Distributional PAC-Learning from Nisan's Natural Proofs

Ari Karchmer

2023-12-01

Abstract:Carmosino et al. (2016) demonstrated that natural proofs of circuit lower bounds for $\Lambda$ imply efficient algorithms for learning $\Lambda$-circuits, but only over \textit{the uniform distribution}, with \textit{membership queries}, and provided $\AC^0[p] \subseteq \Lambda$. We consider whether this implication can be generalized to $\Lambda \not\supseteq \AC^0[p]$, and to learning algorithms which use only random examples and learn over arbitrary example distributions (Valiant's PAC-learning model). We first observe that, if, for any circuit class $\Lambda$, there is an implication from natural proofs for $\Lambda$ to PAC-learning for $\Lambda$, then standard assumptions from lattice-based cryptography do not hold. In particular, we observe that depth-2 majority circuits are a (conditional) counter example to the implication, since Nisan (1993) gave a natural proof, but Klivans and Sherstov (2009) showed hardness of PAC-learning under lattice-based assumptions. We thus ask: what learning algorithms can we reasonably expect to follow from Nisan's natural proofs? Our main result is that all natural proofs arising from a type of communication complexity argument, including Nisan's, imply PAC-learning algorithms in a new \textit{distributional} variant (i.e., an ``average-case'' relaxation) of Valiant's PAC model. Our distributional PAC model is stronger than the average-case prediction model of Blum et al. (1993) and the heuristic PAC model of Nanashima (2021), and has several important properties which make it of independent interest, such as being \textit{boosting-friendly}. The main applications of our result are new distributional PAC-learning algorithms for depth-2 majority circuits, polytopes and DNFs over natural target distributions, as well as the nonexistence of encoded-input weak PRFs that can be evaluated by depth-2 majority circuits.

Computational Complexity,Machine Learning
Rational Proofs with Multiple Provers.

Jing Chen,Samuel McCauley,Shikha Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2840728.2840744

2015-01-01

Abstract:Interactive proofs model a world where a veri fi er delegates computation to an untrustworthy prover, verifying the prover's claims before accepting them. These proofs have applications to delegation of computation, probabilistically checkable proofs, crowdsourcing, and more.In some of these applications, the veri fi er may pay the prover based on the quality of his work. Rational proofs, introduced by Azar and Micali (2012), are an interactive proof model in which the prover is rational rather than untrustworthy-he may lie, but only to increase his payment. This allows the veri fi er to leverage the greed of the prover to obtain better protocols: while rational proofs are no more powerful than interactive proofs, the protocols are simpler and more e ffi cient. Azar and Micali posed as an open problem whether multiple provers are more powerful than one for rational proofs.We provide a model that extends rational proofs to allow multiple provers. In this model, a veri fi er can cross-check the answers received by asking several provers. The veri fi er can pay the provers according to the quality of their work, incentivizing them to provide correct information.We analyze rational proofs with multiple provers from a complexity- theoretic point of view. We fully characterize this model by giving tight upper and lower bounds on its power. On the way, we resolve Azar and Micali's open problem in the a ffi rmative, showing that multiple rational provers are strictly more powerful than one (under standard complexity- theoretic assumptions). We further show that the full power of rational proofs with multiple provers can be achieved using only two provers and fi ve rounds of interaction. Finally, we consider more demanding models where the veri fi er wants the provers' payment to decrease significantly when they are lying, and fully characterize the power of the model when the payment gap must be noticeable (i. e., at least 1/p where p is a polynomial).
Interactive proofs with competing teams of no-signaling provers

Gus Gutoski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1012.0821

2010-12-03

Computational Complexity

Abstract:This paper studies a generalization of multi-prover interactive proofs in which a verifier interacts with two competing teams of provers: one team attempts to convince the verifier to accept while the other attempts to convince the verifier to reject. Each team consists of two provers who jointly implement a no-signaling strategy. No-signaling strategies are a curious class of joint strategy that cannot in general be implemented without communication between the provers, yet cannot be used as a black box to establish communication between them. Attention is restricted in this paper to two-turn interactions in which the verifier asks questions of each of the four provers and decides whether to accept or reject based on their responses. We prove that the complexity class of decision problems that admit two-turn interactive proofs with competing teams of no-signaling provers is a subset of PSPACE. This upper bound matches existing PSPACE lower bounds on the following two disparate and weaker classes of interactive proof: 1. Two-turn multi-prover interactive proofs with only one team of no-signaling provers. 2. Two-turn competing-prover interactive proofs with only one prover per team. Our result implies that the complexity of these two models is unchanged by the addition of a second competing team of no-signaling provers in the first case and by the addition of a second no-signaling prover to each team in the second case. Moreover, our result unifies and subsumes prior PSPACE upper bounds on these classes.
CoProver: A Recommender System for Proof Construction

Eric Yeh,Briland Hitaj,Sam Owre,Maena Quemener,Natarajan Shankar

2023-03-02

Abstract:Interactive Theorem Provers (ITPs) are an indispensable tool in the arsenal of formal method experts as a platform for construction and (formal) verification of proofs. The complexity of the proofs in conjunction with the level of expertise typically required for the process to succeed can often hinder the adoption of ITPs. A recent strain of work has investigated methods to incorporate machine learning models trained on ITP user activity traces as a viable path towards full automation. While a valuable line of investigation, many problems still require human supervision to be completed fully, thus applying learning methods to assist the user with useful recommendations can prove more fruitful. Following the vein of user assistance, we introduce CoProver, a proof recommender system based on transformers, capable of learning from past actions during proof construction, all while exploring knowledge stored in the ITP concerning previous proofs. CoProver employs a neurally learnt sequence-based encoding of sequents, capturing long distance relationships between terms and hidden cues therein. We couple CoProver with the Prototype Verification System (PVS) and evaluate its performance on two key areas, namely: (1) Next Proof Action Recommendation, and (2) Relevant Lemma Retrieval given a library of theories. We evaluate CoProver on a series of well-established metrics originating from the recommender system and information retrieval communities, respectively. We show that CoProver successfully outperforms prior state of the art applied to recommendation in the domain. We conclude by discussing future directions viable for CoProver (and similar approaches) such as argument prediction, proof summarization, and more.

Logic in Computer Science,Information Retrieval,Machine Learning
On the Proof Complexity of Deep Inference

Paola Bruscoli,Alessio Guglielmi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1462179.1462186

2009-04-20

Abstract:We obtain two results about the proof complexity of deep inference: 1) deep-inference proof systems are as powerful as Frege ones, even when both are extended with the Tseitin extension rule or with the substitution rule; 2) there are analytic deep-inference proof systems that exhibit an exponential speed-up over analytic Gentzen proof systems that they polynomially simulate.

Computational Complexity,Logic in Computer Science,Logic
Efficient Rational Proofs with Strong Utility-Gap Guarantees

Jing Chen,Samuel McCauley,Shikha Singh

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99660-8_14

2018-01-01

Abstract:As modern computing moves towards smaller devices and powerful cloud platforms, more and more computation is being delegated to powerful service providers. Interactive proofs are a widely-used model to design efficient protocols for verifiable computation delegation. Rational proofs are payment-based interactive proofs. The payments are designed to incentivize the provers to give correct answers. If the provers misreport the answer then they incur a payment loss of at least 1/u, where u is the utility gap of the protocol. In this work, we tightly characterize the power of rational proofs that are super efficient, that is, require only logarithmic time and communication for verification. We also characterize the power of single-round rational protocols that require only logarithmic space and randomness for verification. Our protocols have strong (that is, polynomial, logarithmic, and even constant) utility gap. Finally, we show when and how rational protocols can be converted to give the completeness and soundness guarantees of classical interactive proofs.
Interactive proofs with approximately commuting provers

Matthew Coudron,Thomas Vidick

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1510.00102

2015-10-01

Quantum Physics

Abstract:The class $\MIP^*$ of promise problems that can be decided through an interactive proof system with multiple entangled provers provides a complexity-theoretic framework for the exploration of the nonlocal properties of entanglement. Little is known about the power of this class. The only proposed approach for establishing upper bounds is based on a hierarchy of semidefinite programs introduced independently by Pironio et al. and Doherty et al. This hierarchy converges to a value that is only known to coincide with the provers' maximum success probability in a given proof system under a plausible but difficult mathematical conjecture, Connes' embedding conjecture. No bounds on the rate of convergence are known. We introduce a rounding scheme for the hierarchy, establishing that any solution to its $N$-th level can be mapped to a strategy for the provers in which measurement operators associated with distinct provers have pairwise commutator bounded by $O(\ell^2/\sqrt{N})$ in operator norm, where $\ell$ is the number of possible answers per prover. Our rounding scheme motivates the introduction of a variant of $\MIP^*$, called $\MIP_\delta^*$, in which the soundness property is required to hold as long as the commutator of operations performed by distinct provers has norm at most $\delta$. Our rounding scheme implies the upper bound $\MIP_\delta^* \subseteq \DTIME(\exp(\exp(\poly)/\delta^2))$. In terms of lower bounds we establish that $\MIP^*_{2^{-\poly}}$, with completeness $1$ and soundness $1-2^{-\poly}$, contains $\NEXP$. The relationship of $\MIP_\delta^*$ to $\MIPstar$ has connections with the mathematical literature on approximate commutation. Our rounding scheme gives an elementary proof that the Strong Kirchberg Conjecture implies that $\MIPstar$ is computable. We discuss applications to device-independent cryptography.
Proving Theorems using Incremental Learning and Hindsight Experience Replay

Eser Aygün,Laurent Orseau,Ankit Anand,Xavier Glorot,Vlad Firoiu,Lei M. Zhang,Doina Precup,Shibl Mourad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2112.10664

2021-12-21

Abstract:Traditional automated theorem provers for first-order logic depend on speed-optimized search and many handcrafted heuristics that are designed to work best over a wide range of domains. Machine learning approaches in literature either depend on these traditional provers to bootstrap themselves or fall short on reaching comparable performance. In this paper, we propose a general incremental learning algorithm for training domain specific provers for first-order logic without equality, based only on a basic given-clause algorithm, but using a learned clause-scoring function. Clauses are represented as graphs and presented to transformer networks with spectral features. To address the sparsity and the initial lack of training data as well as the lack of a natural curriculum, we adapt hindsight experience replay to theorem proving, so as to be able to learn even when no proof can be found. We show that provers trained this way can match and sometimes surpass state-of-the-art traditional provers on the TPTP dataset in terms of both quantity and quality of the proofs.

Artificial Intelligence,Logic in Computer Science
Don't Call Us, We'll Call You: Towards Mixed-Initiative Interactive Proof Assistants for Programming Language Theory

Jan Liam Verter,Tomas Petricek

2024-09-21

Abstract:There are two kinds of systems that programming language researchers use for their work. Semantics engineering tools let them interactively explore their definitions, while proof assistants can be used to check the proofs of their properties. The disconnect between the two kinds of systems leads to errors in accepted publications and also limits the modes of interaction available when writing proofs. When constructing a proof, one typically states the property and then develops the proof manually until an automatic strategy can fill the remaining gaps. We believe that an integrated and more interactive tool that leverages the typical structure of programming language could do better. A proof assistant aware of the typical structure of programming language proofs could require less human input, assist the user in understanding their proofs, but also use insights from the exploration of executable semantics in proof construction. In the early work presented in this paper, we focus on the problem of interacting with a proof assistant and leave the semantics engineering part to the future. Rather than starting with manual proof construction and then completing the last steps automatically, we propose a way of working where the tool starts with an automatic proof search and then breaks when it requires feedback from the user. We build a small proof assistant that follows this mode of interaction and illustrates the idea using a simple proof of the commutativity of the "+" operation for Peano arithmetic. Our early experience suggests that this way of working can make proof construction easier.

Programming Languages

On the Power of Interactive Proofs for Learning

Practical, Provably-Correct Interactive Learning in the Realizable Setting: The Power of True Believers

G T ] 9 A pr 2 01 8 Rational Proofs with Non-Cooperative Provers

Interactive Proofs with Quantum Finite Automata

A logic of interactive proofs

Pseudo-deterministic Proofs

Improvements on Non-Interactive Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems Related to Quadratic Residuosity Languages.

Neural Interactive Proofs

Trade-offs in Distributed Interactive Proofs

Making $\textsf{IP}=\textsf{PSPACE}$ Practical: Efficient Interactive Protocols for BDD Algorithms

Non-Cooperative Rational Interactive Proofs

Interactive proofs for verifying (quantum) learning and testing

Distributional PAC-Learning from Nisan's Natural Proofs

Rational Proofs with Multiple Provers.

Interactive proofs with competing teams of no-signaling provers

CoProver: A Recommender System for Proof Construction

On the Proof Complexity of Deep Inference

Efficient Rational Proofs with Strong Utility-Gap Guarantees

Interactive proofs with approximately commuting provers

Proving Theorems using Incremental Learning and Hindsight Experience Replay

Don't Call Us, We'll Call You: Towards Mixed-Initiative Interactive Proof Assistants for Programming Language Theory