Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit. #41

porcuquine · 2023-09-07T00:23:49Z

This PR formalizes the requirement that the new program counter returned from circuit_supernova::StepCircuit::synthesize() is the one assigned to the circuit that is actually synthesized at each step.

The previous TestROM example actually did not follow this convention but rather used the program counter for its own purposes, as an index into a predetermined sequence of operations — then enforced the correctness of this ad-hoc indexing scheme in each circuit.

The current work enforces the constraint that pc has been correctly calculated and returned from each circuit, requiring that it is interpreted precisely as that circuit's assigned index in the RunningClaims.

In order to make the existing tests pass, they were reworked to re-envision the pseudo-pc enforcement at the start of each circuit — to a calculation (morally $\varphi$) of the new pc to be returned at the 'end' of the circuit. Without this change, the existing tests fail, exactly as expected, since pc was a monotonically increasing value, rather than the index of the chosen next circuit.

The circuit necessarily grows by one constraint.

Since the goal is that for the SuperNova user (the application/protocol/proof developer), the enforcement is performed by a new, internal trait circuit_supernova::EnforcingStepCircuit — which is automatically implemented for types that implement circuit_supernova::StepCircuit.

hero78119 · 2023-09-07T14:33:37Z

LGTM! it's nice to formalize and align terminology of pc with Supernova paper, so it will be friendly for audience came from paper reading. Besides it also cover TestROM use case properly in test case, still left the door open for other applications 👍

huitseeker

Thanks a bunch!

huitseeker · 2023-09-08T19:24:21Z

src/supernova/test.rs

+  Ok(c)
+}
+
+fn next_rom_index_and_pc<F: PrimeField, CS: ConstraintSystem<F>>(


This would benefit from a doctoring no?

I'm not sure what you mean. The name? I'm not keen on getting too deep into design/engineering of the 'API' for the toy ROM example, since it's pretty contrived in its current state anyway. But I may also miss what you are suggesting.

This backports the following Arecibo PRs: - #2 - #3 - #10 - #16 - #23 - #30 - #28 - #41 - #45 - #50 - #56 - #51 - #72 - #92 - #95 - #97 - #101 - #110 - #106 - #112 - #114 - #119 - #120 - #127 - #123 - #131 - #174 - #175 - #182 Co-authored-by: WYATT <wyattbenno@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Hanting Zhang <hantingz@usc.edu> Co-authored-by: Ming <hero78119@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: porcuquine <porcuquine@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Samuel Burnham <45365069+samuelburnham@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Matej Penciak <96667244+mpenciak@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Adrian Hamelink <adrian.hamelink@gmail.com>

This implements [Supernova](https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/1758), allowing: - a 'pay-as-you-go' cost structure for folding operations, through the SuperNova folding scheme, - a final SNARK that efficiently compresses an instance of this folded proof, through batching techniques. References: - the [blog post](https://blog.lurk-lang.org/posts/arecibo-supernova/#technical-release-note-supernova-protocol-integration-into-nova) goes into our construction, and links to two more specialized notes on [the `CompressedSNARK` for Supernova](https://hackmd.io/@adr1anh/BJw1g0aBT) along with our variant of the [public input padding issue](https://hackmd.io/@adr1anh/Sy08YaVBa). - the Readme at `src/supernova/Readme.md` This backports the following Arecibo PRs: - lurk-lab/arecibo#2 - lurk-lab/arecibo#3 - lurk-lab/arecibo#10 - lurk-lab/arecibo#16 - lurk-lab/arecibo#23 - lurk-lab/arecibo#30 - lurk-lab/arecibo#28 - lurk-lab/arecibo#41 - lurk-lab/arecibo#45 - lurk-lab/arecibo#50 - lurk-lab/arecibo#56 - lurk-lab/arecibo#51 - lurk-lab/arecibo#72 - lurk-lab/arecibo#92 - lurk-lab/arecibo#95 - lurk-lab/arecibo#97 - lurk-lab/arecibo#101 - lurk-lab/arecibo#110 - lurk-lab/arecibo#106 - lurk-lab/arecibo#112 - lurk-lab/arecibo#114 - lurk-lab/arecibo#119 - lurk-lab/arecibo#120 - lurk-lab/arecibo#127 - lurk-lab/arecibo#123 - lurk-lab/arecibo#131 - lurk-lab/arecibo#174 - lurk-lab/arecibo#175 - lurk-lab/arecibo#182 Co-authored-by: WYATT <wyattbenno@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Hanting Zhang <hantingz@usc.edu> Co-authored-by: Ming <hero78119@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: porcuquine <porcuquine@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Samuel Burnham <45365069+samuelburnham@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Matej Penciak <96667244+mpenciak@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Adrian Hamelink <adrian.hamelink@gmail.com>

porcuquine force-pushed the constrain-index branch from 6daa4d3 to a73d9a6 Compare September 7, 2023 00:40

porcuquine requested a review from huitseeker September 7, 2023 00:40

porcuquine force-pushed the constrain-index branch 3 times, most recently from bd176a1 to 4cbff2b Compare September 7, 2023 00:55

porcuquine marked this pull request as ready for review September 7, 2023 00:56

Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit.

4bf94c5

porcuquine force-pushed the constrain-index branch from 4cbff2b to 4bf94c5 Compare September 7, 2023 01:58

porcuquine added 3 commits September 6, 2023 21:19

Improve documentation.

79994ed

Rename pseudo_pc to rom_index.

5e2b6ca

Cleanup TestROM example.

5633cc9

porcuquine force-pushed the constrain-index branch from f9a3215 to 5633cc9 Compare September 7, 2023 04:45

porcuquine requested a review from emmorais September 7, 2023 05:20

emmorais approved these changes Sep 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

huitseeker approved these changes Sep 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

porcuquine added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 8, 2023

Merged via the queue into dev with commit d102a28 Sep 8, 2023
2 checks passed

porcuquine deleted the constrain-index branch September 8, 2023 21:58

porcuquine mentioned this pull request Nov 22, 2023

enforce pc in LEM SuperNova lurk-lab/lurk-rs#913

Closed

huitseeker added the supernova label Dec 17, 2023

huitseeker mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2023

feat: implement SuperNova microsoft/Nova#283

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit. #41

Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit. #41

porcuquine commented Sep 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

hero78119 commented Sep 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

huitseeker left a comment

huitseeker Sep 8, 2023

porcuquine Sep 8, 2023

Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit. #41

Enforce program counter in SuperNova StepCircuit. #41

Conversation

porcuquine commented Sep 7, 2023 • edited Loading

hero78119 commented Sep 7, 2023 • edited Loading

huitseeker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

huitseeker Sep 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

porcuquine Sep 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

porcuquine commented Sep 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading

hero78119 commented Sep 7, 2023 •

edited

Loading