24 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Daniel Lubarov
5a5a86a416 First bit of verifier
Mostly stubbed out, more coming soon...
2021-05-26 16:23:17 -07:00
wborgeaud
9cd00532ce Generic tests 2021-05-18 16:06:47 +02:00
wborgeaud
adf5c2d4ec Const generics everywhere 2021-05-18 15:44:50 +02:00
wborgeaud
a2cf2c03b6 Working FRI with field extensions 2021-05-18 15:22:06 +02:00
Daniel Lubarov
7ff5496308 num_checks -> num_challenges 2021-05-14 08:07:00 -07:00
wborgeaud
ce0507ba12 Blinding parameter can be set differently for each Merkle tree in a FRI proof. 2021-05-11 09:56:21 +02:00
wborgeaud
1bae3a02f6 Batch open for PLONK 2021-05-07 11:30:03 +02:00
Daniel Lubarov
a50ba9f590 More unnecessary clones 2021-04-24 11:20:28 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
6d164adc6a Have the prover use the new MerkleTree API
Before it was storing leaf data and Merkle roots, but nothing in between, since it wasn't yet interacting with intermediate layers (but it will once we hook up the FRI code).
2021-04-24 11:15:11 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
b7bc1bf313 Seed Challenger with a hash of the instance
I think this is the recommended way to apply Fiat-Shamir, to avoid any possible attacks like taking someone else's proof and using it to prove a slightly different statement.
2021-04-22 16:38:49 -07:00
wborgeaud
6b407e45ef Progress on FRI 2021-04-21 22:31:45 +02:00
Daniel Lubarov
cb1c69e50f Validate that the cosets for Plonk's permutation argument are disjoint
When we had a large field, we could just pick random shifts, and get disjoint cosets with high probability. With a 64-bit field, I think the probability of a collision is non-negligible (something like 1 in a million), so we should probably verify that the cosets are disjoint.

If there are any concerns with this method (or if it's just confusing), I think it would also be reasonable to use the brute force approach of explicitly computing the cosets and checking that they're disjoint. I coded that as well, and it took like 80ms, so not really a big deal since it's a one-time preprocessing cost.

Also fixes some overflow bugs in the inversion code.
2021-04-04 14:34:33 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
22f7c359af Fix visibility 2021-04-03 15:30:33 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
524005579d Comments etc 2021-04-02 20:58:19 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
80e87becb8 Minor refactor 2021-04-02 19:15:39 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
4086b2b447 Arithmetic & permutation gadgets 2021-04-02 15:29:21 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
8302c10f21 Multiple vanishing polys, and multiple associated quotient polys
With different random alphas
2021-04-01 13:22:54 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
347206d161 Add Z terms in vanishing poly 2021-03-30 23:12:47 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
44eeb505eb Tweaks 2021-03-30 10:02:00 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
f42120482a No more polynomial programming abstraction
It was too expensive.
2021-03-28 19:52:01 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
ba96ab4e99 More prover work 2021-03-26 23:51:48 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
5f92611df1 Bit of prover work 2021-03-21 11:57:33 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
75b9340000 Tweak APIs 2021-03-21 11:29:47 -07:00
Daniel Lubarov
13cc76316c Initial commit 2021-02-17 14:36:32 -08:00