Distributed certification is a set of mechanisms that allows an all-knowing prover to convince the units of a communication network that the network's state has a desired property, such as being 3-colorable or free of a predefined subgraph. Classical mechanisms, such as proof labeling schemes (PLS), consist of a message from the prover to each unit, followed by one round of communication among neighbors. Later works consider extensions, called distributed interactive proofs, where the prover and the units can have multiple rounds of communication before the communication among the units. Recently, Bick, Kol, and Oshman (SODA '22) defined a zero-knowledge version of distributed interactive proofs, where the prover convinces the units that the network satisfies the property without revealing any additional information about the network's state or structure.

Abstract Distributed proofs are mechanisms that enable the nodes of a network to collectively and efficiently check the correctness of Boolean predicates on the structure of the network (e.g., having a specific diameter), or on objects distributed over the nodes (e.g., a spanning tree). We consider well known mechanisms consisting of two components: aproverthat assigns acertificateto each node, and a distributed algorithm called averifierthat is in charge of verifying the distributed proof formed by the collection of all certificates. We show that many network predicates have distributed proofs offering a high level of redundancy, explicitly or implicitly. We use this remarkable property of distributed proofs to establish perfect tradeoffs between thesize of the certificatestored at every node, and thenumber of roundsof the verification protocol.

Verifying that a network configuration satisfies a given boolean predicate is a fundamental problem in distributed computing. Many variations of this problem have been studied, for example, in the context of proof labeling schemes (PLS), locally checkable proofs (LCP), and non-deterministic local decision (NLD). In all of these contexts, verification time is assumed to be constant. Korman, Kutten and Masuzawa presented a proof-labeling scheme for MST, with poly-logarithmic verification time, and logarithmic memory at each vertex. In this paper we introduce the notion of a t-PLS, which allows the verification procedure to run for super-constant time. Our work analyzes the tradeoffs of t-PLS between time, label size, message length, and computation space. We construct a universal t-PLS and prove that it uses the same amount of total communication as a known one-round universal PLS, and t factor smaller labels. In addition, we provide a general technique to prove lower bounds for space- time tradeoffs of t-PLS. We use this technique to show an optimal tradeoff for testing that a network is acyclic (cycle free). Our optimal t-PLS for acyclicity uses label size and computation space O((log n)/t). We further describe a recursive O(log* n) space verifier for acyclicity which does not assume previous knowledge of the run-time t.

Proof-labeling schemes, introduced by Korman, Kutten and Peleg [PODC 2005], are a mechanism to certify that a network configuration satisfies a given boolean predicate. Such mechanisms find applications in many contexts, e.g., the design of fault-tolerant distributed algorithms. In a proof-labeling scheme, predicate verification consists of neighbors exchanging labels, whose contents depends on the predicate. In this paper, we introduce the notion of randomized proof-labeling schemes where messages are randomized and correctness is probabilistic. We show that randomization reduces label size exponentially while guaranteeing probability of correctness arbitrarily close to one. In addition, we present a novel label-size lower bound technique that applies to both deterministic and randomized proof-labeling schemes. Using this technique, we establish several tight bounds on the verification complexity of MST, acyclicity, connectivity, and longest cycle size.