EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Alexander Vlasov
dblp:249/0621
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2022
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Security and privacy · 1 · 1 since 2021
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.
| Network and information security
1 paper |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 67% Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › cryptographic foundations › cryptographic commitments
polynomial commitment |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | RedShift: Transparent SNARKs from List Polynomial Commitments · CCS 2022 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems › zero-knowledge proofs › succinct arguments
transparent zk-SNARKs |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | RedShift: Transparent SNARKs from List Polynomial Commitments · CCS 2022 |
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation › proof systems
zero-knowledge proofs |
0.6 | 1 | 2022 | RedShift: Transparent SNARKs from List Polynomial Commitments · CCS 2022 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
polynomial commitment · 0.6IOP · 0.6
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | RedShift: Transparent SNARKs from List Polynomial CommitmentsabstractWe introduce an efficient transformation from univariate polynomial commitment based zk-SNARKs to their transparent counterparts. The transformation is achieved with the help of a new IOP primitive which we call a list polynomial commitment. This primitive is applicable for preprocessing zk-SNARKs over both prime and binary fields. We present the primitive itself along with a soundness analysis of the transformation and instantiate it with an existing universal proof system. We also present benchmarks for a proof of concept implementation alongside a comparison with the current non-transparent state-of-the-art. Our results show competitive efficiency both in terms of proof size and generation times. At the 80-bit security level, our benchmarks provide proof generation times of about a minute and proof sizes of around 515 KB for a circuit with one million gates. Assimakis Kattis, Konstantin Panarin, Alexander Vlasov |
CCS | 3 |