Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Ricky Rosen

dblp:85/3467 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
5ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2012
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 5 · 1 first-authorDatabases, data management, data science and information retrieval · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
2 papers
Computational complexity · 91% Algorithms and data structures · 9%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 7, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational complexity › probabilistically checkable proofs
parallel repetition
0.112012
A Strong Parallel Repetition Theorem for Projection Games on Expanders · CCC 2012
Computational complexity
proof complexity
0.112012
A Strong Parallel Repetition Theorem for Projection Games on Expanders · CCC 2012
Computational complexity
two-prover games
0.112012
A Strong Parallel Repetition Theorem for Projection Games on Expanders · CCC 2012
Computational complexity › lattice problems
closest vector problem
0.112006
Lattice problems and norm embeddings · STOC 2006
Computational complexity
lattice problems
0.112006
Lattice problems and norm embeddings · STOC 2006
Algorithms and data structures › metric embedding
norm embedding
0.112006
Lattice problems and norm embeddings · STOC 2006
Computational complexity › lattice problems
shortest vector problem
0.112006
Lattice problems and norm embeddings · STOC 2006

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

spectral gap · 0.1expander graphs · 0.1reduction · 0.1norm embeddings · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2012 A Strong Parallel Repetition Theorem for Projection Games on Expanders
abstract
The parallel repetition theorem states that for any Two Prover Game with value at most 1-€ (for €3)Ω(n/s), where s is the length of the answers of the two provers [24], [17]. For Projection Games, the bound on the value of the game repeated n times in parallel was improved to (1 - €2)Ω(n)[23] and this bound was shown to be tight [25]. In this paper we study the case where the underlying distribution, according to which the questions for the two provers are generated, is uniform over the edges of a (bipartite) expander graph. We show that if λ is the (normalized) spectral gap of the underlying graph, the value of the repeated game is at most (1 - €2)Ω(c(λ)·n/s), where c(λ) = poly(λ); and if in addition the game is a projection game, we obtain a bound of (1 - €)Ω(c(λ)·n), where c(λ) = poly(λ), that is, a strong parallel repetition theorem (when λ is constant). This gives a strong parallel repetition theorem for a large class of two prover games.
Ran Raz, Ricky Rosen
CCC2
2010 A K-Provers Parallel Repetition Theorem for a Version of No-Signaling Model
Ricky Rosen
COCOON1
2009 Strong Parallel Repetition Theorem for Free Projection Games
Boaz Barak, Anup Rao 0001, Ran Raz, Ricky Rosen, Ronen Shaltiel
APPROX-RANDOM4
2006 Lattice problems and norm embeddings
abstract
We present reductions from lattice problems in the l2 norm to the corresponding problems in other norms such as l1, l∞ (and in fact in any other lp norm where 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞). We consider lattice problems such as the Shortest Vector Problem, Shortest Independent Vector Problem, Closest Vector Problem and the Closest Vector Problem with Preprocessing. Most reductions are simple and follow from known constructions of embeddings of normed spaces.Among other things, our reductions imply that the Shortest Vector Problem in the l1 norm and the Closest Vector Problem with Preprocessing in the l∞ norm are hard to approximate to within any constant (and beyond). Previously, the former problem was known to be hard to approximate to within 2-ε, while no hardness result was known for the latter problem.
Oded Regev 0001, Ricky Rosen
STOC2
2006 A note on Unique Games
Adi Avidor, Ricky Rosen
Inf. Process. Lett.2