Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 36 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Proof size should not depend on the number of boundary and transition constraints #5
Right now, STARK proofs include values for all P(x), B(x), and D(x) for all spot checks. Specifically, a leaf of the evaluation Merkle tree has the following form:
This means that the proof size grows with the number of registers
While we can't do anything about
However, to compute a linear combination, we need a source of randomness, and at the time we build a Merkle tree of evaluations, we don't have anything "random" (once it is built, we use the root of the evaluation Merkle tree as the source of randomness).
One approach to address this could be:
If we can re-purpose the tree we use to prove correctness of random linear combination for low degree proof, than this will come at almost no extra cost.