s/neglegible/negligible/

1 files changed, 6 insertions, 6 deletions

diff --git a/games/games.tex b/games/games.tex
index 7324276..847daea 100644
--- a/games/games.tex
+++ b/games/games.tex
@@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ the assurances of Income Transparency.
 
 For some instantiations, e.g. ones based on zero knowledge proofs, $\kappa$
 might be a security parameter in the traditional sense.  However to
-be useful in practice, the adversary does not need to have neglegible
+be useful in practice, the adversary does not need to have negligible
 success probability to win the Income Transparency game.  It suffices
 that the financial losses of the adversary in the game are a deterrent, 
 afterall the purpose of the game is to characterize tax evasion.
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ for other instantiations that provide more absolute guarantees.
 
 \subsection{Anonymity}
 Intuitively, an adversary $\prt{A}$ (controlling the exchange and merchants) wins the
-anonymity game if they have a non-neglegible advantage in correlating spending operations
+anonymity game if they have a non-negligible advantage in correlating spending operations
 with the withdrawal or refresh operations that created a coin used in the
 spending operation.
 
@@ -553,13 +553,13 @@ that enables fair exchange.  Unlinkability is guaranteed by the Refresh protocol
 \begin{definition}[Anonymity]
 We say that an e-cash scheme satisfies \emph{Anonymity} if
 the success probability $\Prb{b \randsel \{0,1\}: \mathit{Exp}_{\cal A}^{anon}(1^\lambda, 1^\kappa, b) = 1}$
-of the anonymity game is neglegible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
+of the anonymity game is negligible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
 \end{definition}
 
 \begin{definition}[Strong Income Transparency]
 We say that an e-cash scheme satisfies \emph{Strong Income Transparency} if
 the success probability $\Prb{(L, w, w', s) \leftarrow \mathit{Exp}_{\cal A}^{income}(1^\lambda, 1^\kappa); L - w' > 0}$
-for the income transparency game is neglegible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
+for the income transparency game is negligible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
 \end{definition}
 
 \begin{definition}[Weak Income Transparency]
@@ -579,14 +579,14 @@ but the condition restricts it to games in which $p \over b + p$ is defined.
 \begin{definition}[Unforgeability]
 We say that an e-cash scheme satisfies \emph{Unforgeability} if
 the success probability $\Prb{\mathit{Exp}_{\cal A}^{forge}(1^\lambda, 1^\kappa) = 1}$
-of the unforgeability game is neglegible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
+of the unforgeability game is negligible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
 \end{definition}
 
 
 \begin{definition}[Fairness]
 We say that an e-cash scheme satisfies \emph{Fairness} if
 the success probability $\Prb{\mathit{Exp}_{\cal A}^{fair}(1^\lambda, 1^\kappa) = 1}$
-of the fairness game is neglegible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
+of the fairness game is negligible for any polynomial time adversary $\mathcal{A}$.
 \end{definition}
 
 \section{Instantiation}