Información sobre | Palabra Inglés PROVER

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Ejemplos de uso de PROVER en una oración

• Logic for Computable Functions, an interactive automated theorem prover, 1973 formalism by Robin Milner.
• The prover possesses unlimited computational resources but cannot be trusted, while the verifier has bounded computation power but is assumed to be always honest.
• The Isabelle automated theorem prover is a higher-order logic (HOL) theorem prover, written in Standard ML and Scala.
• Logic for Computable Functions (LCF) is an interactive automated theorem prover developed at Stanford and Edinburgh by Robin Milner and collaborators in early 1970s, based on the theoretical foundation of logic of computable functions previously proposed by Dana Scott.
• ACL2 (A Computational Logic for Applicative Common Lisp) is a software system consisting of a programming language, an extensible theory in a first-order logic, and an automated theorem prover.
• EQP (Equational prover) is an automated theorem proving program for equational logic, developed by the Mathematics and Computer Science Division of the Argonne National Laboratory.
• Otter is an automated theorem prover developed by William McCune at Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois.
• pdf "Without Loss of Generality" by John Harrison - discussion of formalizing "WLOG" arguments in an automated theorem prover.
• The verifier can then present an identifier, and the prover must respond with the correct password for that identifier.
• Commitments are used in zero-knowledge proofs for two main purposes: first, to allow the prover to participate in "cut and choose" proofs where the verifier will be presented with a choice of what to learn, and the prover will reveal only what corresponds to the verifier's choice.
• In cryptography, a zero-knowledge proof is a protocol in which one party (the prover) can convince another party (the verifier) that some given statement is true, without conveying to the verifier any information beyond the mere fact of that statement's truth.
• The following example run, obtained from the E theorem prover, computes a completion of the (additive) group axioms as in Knuth, Bendix (1970).
• The fact that MIP proof systems can solve every problem in NEXPTIME is quite impressive when we consider that when only one prover is present, we can only recognize all of PSPACE; the verifier's ability to "cross-examine" the two provers gives it great power.
• Vandevoorde and Deepak Kapur, "Distributed Larch Prover (DLP): an experiment in parallelizing a rewrite-rule based prover",.
• Note: An n-tuple of clause attributes is similar (but not the same) to the feature vector named by Stephan Schulz, PhD (see E equational theorem prover).
• A key feature of proof-of-work schemes is their asymmetry: the work – the computation – must be moderately hard (yet feasible) on the prover or requester side but easy to check for the verifier or service provider.
• Non-interactive zero-knowledge proof, a common random string shared between the prover and the verifier is enough to achieve computational zero-knowledge without requiring interaction.
• In cryptography, a zero-knowledge password proof (ZKPP) is a type of zero-knowledge proof that allows one party (the prover) to prove to another party (the verifier) that it knows a value of a password, without revealing anything other than the fact that it knows the password to the verifier.
• The opposite inclusion is straightforward, because the verifier can always send to the prover the results of their private coin tosses, which proves that the two types of protocols are equivalent.
• The former parameterises what the transcript leaks about the secret knowledge, and the latter parameterises the chance with which a dishonest prover can convince an honest verifier that he knows a secret even if he doesn't.
• Other "searching" programs were able to accomplish impressive tasks like solving problems in geometry and algebra, such as Herbert Gelernter's Geometry Theorem Prover (1958) and Symbolic Automatic Integrator (SAINT), written by Minsky's student James Slagle in 1961.
• The cognitive trapdoor game has three groups involved in it: a machine verifier, a human prover, and a human observer.
• For example, an automated theorem prover or theorem checker can increase a programmer's (or language designer's) confidence in the correctness of proofs about programs (or the language itself).
• Like all zero-knowledge proofs, it allows one party, the Prover, to prove to another party, the Verifier, that they possess secret information without revealing to Verifier what that secret information is.
• In a typical zero-knowledge proof of a statement, the prover will use a witness for the statement as input to the protocol, and the verifier will learn nothing other than the truth of the statement.

La preparación de la página tomó: 239,42 ms.