arnaucube/math
1
1
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/arnaucube/math.git synced 2026-01-10 16:01:31 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

add typos.toml config and fix typos

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
arnaucube
2024-03-16 11:36:56 +01:00
parent a8949595a5
commit 4828f66236
24 changed files with 51 additions and 26 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
notes_nova.tex
View File

@@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ Problem: not non-trivial, and not zero-knowledge. Solution: use polynomial commi
\paragraph{Committed Relaxed R1CS}
Instance for a Committed Relaxed R1CS\\
$(\overline{E}, u, \overline{W}, x)$, satisfyied by a witness $(E, r_E, W, r_W)$ such that
$(\overline{E}, u, \overline{W}, x)$, satisfied by a witness $(E, r_E, W, r_W)$ such that
\begin{align*}
&\overline{E} = Com(E, r_E)\\
&\overline{W} = Com(E, r_W)\\
@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ P will prove that knows the valid witness $(E, r_E, W, r_W)$ for the committed r
The previous protocol achieves non-interactivity via Fiat-Shamir transform, obtaining a \emph{Non-Interactive Folding Scheme for Committed Relaxed R1CS}.
Note: the paper later uses $\mathsf{u}_i,~ \mathsf{U}_i$ for the two inputed $\varphi_1,~ \varphi_2$, and later $\mathsf{u}_{i+1}$ for the outputed $\varphi$. Also, the paper later uses $\mathsf{w},~ \mathsf{W}$ to refer to the witnesses of two folded instances (eg. $\mathsf{w}=(E, r_E, W, r_W)$).
Note: the paper later uses $\mathsf{u}_i,~ \mathsf{U}_i$ for the two inputted $\varphi_1,~ \varphi_2$, and later $\mathsf{u}_{i+1}$ for the outputted $\varphi$. Also, the paper later uses $\mathsf{w},~ \mathsf{W}$ to refer to the witnesses of two folded instances (eg. $\mathsf{w}=(E, r_E, W, r_W)$).
\subsection{NIFS}