\documentclass{article} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amsthm} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{mathtools} \usepackage{enumerate} \usepackage{hyperref} \usepackage{xcolor} % \usepackage{pgf-umlsd} % diagrams % prevent warnings of underfull \hbox: \usepackage{etoolbox} \apptocmd{\sloppy}{\hbadness 4000\relax}{}{} \theoremstyle{definition} \newtheorem{definition}{Def}[section] \newtheorem{theorem}[definition]{Thm} % custom lemma environment to set custom numbers \newtheorem{innerlemma}{Lemma} \newenvironment{lemma}[1] {\renewcommand\theinnerlemma{#1}\innerlemma} {\endinnerlemma} \title{Notes on FRI} \author{arnaucube} \date{February 2023} \begin{document} \maketitle \begin{abstract} Notes taken from \href{https://sites.google.com/site/vincenzoiovinoit/}{Vincenzo Iovino} \cite{vincenzoiovino} explanations about FRI \cite{fri}, \cite{cryptoeprint:2022/1216}, \cite{cryptoeprint:2019/1020}. These notes are for self-consumption, are not complete, don't include all the steps neither all the proofs. An implementation of FRI can be found at\\ \href{https://github.com/arnaucube/fri-commitment}{https://github.com/arnaucube/fri-commitment} \cite{fri-impl}. \end{abstract} \tableofcontents \section{Preliminaries} \subsection{General degree d test} Query at points $\{ x_i \}_0^{d+1},~z$ (with rand $z \overset{R}{\in} \mathbb{F}$). Interpolate $p(x)$ at $\{f(x_i)\}_0^{d+1}$ to reconstruct the unique polynomial $p$ of degree $d$ such that $p(x_i)=f(x_i)~\forall i=1, \ldots, d+1$. V checks $p(z)=f(z)$, if the check passes, then V is convinced with high probability. This needs $d+2$ queries, is linear, $\mathcal{O}(n)$. With FRI we will have the test in $\mathcal{O}(\log{}d)$. \section{FRI protocol} Allows to test if a function $f$ is a poly of degree $\leq d$ in $\mathcal{O}(\log{}d)$. Note: "P \emph{sends} $f(x)$ to V", "\emph{sends}", in the ideal IOP model means that all the table of $f(x)$ is sent, in practice is sent a commitment to $f(x)$. \subsection{Intuition} V wants to check that two functions $g,~h$ are both polynomials of degree $\leq d$. Consider the following protocol: \begin{enumerate} \item V sends $\alpha \in \mathbb{F}$ to P. P sends $f(x) = g(x) + \alpha h(x)$ to V. \item P sends $f(x)=g(x) + \alpha h(x)$ to V. \item V queries $f(r), ~g(r), ~h(r)$ for rand $r \in \mathbb{F}$. \item V checks $f(r)=g(r) + \alpha h(r)$. (Schwartz-Zippel lema). If holds, V can be certain that $f(x)=g(x)+ \alpha h(x)$. \item P proves that $deg(f) \leq d$. \item If V is convinced that $deg(f) \leq d$, V believes that both $g, h$ have $deg \leq d$. \end{enumerate} %/// TODO tabulate this next lines With high probablility, $\alpha$ will not cancel the coeffs with $deg \geq d+1$. % TODO check which is the name of this theorem or why this is true Let $g(x)=a \cdot x^{d+1}, ~~ h(x)=b \cdot x^{d+1}$, and set $f(x) = g(x) + \alpha h(x)$. Imagine that P can chose $\alpha$ such that $a x^{d+1} + \alpha \cdot b x^{d+1} = 0$, then, in $f(x)$ the coefficients of degree $d+1$ would cancel. %/// \quad Here, P proves $g,~h$ both have $deg \leq d$, but instead of doing $2 \cdot (d+2)$ queries ($d+2$ for $g$, and $d+2$ for $h$), it is done in $d+2$ queries (for $f$). So we halved the number of queries. \subsection{FRI-LDT}\label{sec:fri-ldt} FRI low degree testing.\\ Both P and V have oracle access to function $f$. V wants to test if $f$ is polynomial with $deg(f) \leq d$. Let $f_0(x)=f(x)$. Each polynomial $f(x)$ of degree that is a power of $2$, can be written as $$f(x) = f^L(x^2) + x f^R(x^2)$$ for some polynomials $f^L,~f^R$ of degree $\frac{deg(f)}{2}$, each one containing the even and odd degree coefficients as follows: % $f^L(x)$ is built from the even degree coefficients divided by $x$, and $f^R(x)$ from the odd degree coefficients divided by $x$. $$f^L(x)= \sum_0^{\frac{d+1}{2}-1} c_{2i} x^i ,~~ f^R(x)= \sum_0^{\frac{d+1}{2}-1} c_{2i+1} x^i$$ eg. for $f(x)=x^4+x^3+x^2+x+1$, \begin{align*} \begin{rcases} f^L(x)=x^2+x+1\\ f^R(x)=x+1 \end{rcases} ~f(x) = f^L(x^2) &+ x \cdot f^R(x^2)\\ = (x^2)^2 + (x^2) + 1 &+ x \cdot ((x^2) + 1)\\ = x^4 + x^2 + 1 &+ x^3 + x \end{align*} % \begin{enumerate} % \item V sends to P some $\alpha_0 \in \mathbb{F}$. % Let % \begin{equation}\tag{$A_0$} % f_0(x) = f_0^L(x^2) + x f_0^R(x^2) % \end{equation} % \item P sends % \begin{equation}\tag{$B_0$} % f_1(x) = f_0^L(x) + \alpha_0 f_0^R(x) % \end{equation} % to V. % % (remember that "sends" in IOP model is that P commits to it) % \item V sends to P some $\alpha_1 \in \mathbb{F}$. % Let % \begin{equation}\tag{$A_1$} % f_1(x) = f_1^L(x^2) + x f_1^R(x^2) % \end{equation} % \item P sends % \begin{equation}\tag{$B_1$} % f_2(x) = f_1^L(x) + \alpha_1 f_1^R(x) % \end{equation} % to V. % \item Keep repeating the process, eg. let % \begin{equation}\tag{$A_2$} % f_2(x) = f_2^L(x^2) + x f_2^R(x^2) % \end{equation} % until $f_i^L,~ f_i^R$ are constant (degree 0 polynomials). % \item Once $f_i^L,~ f_i^R$ are constant, P sends them to V. % \end{enumerate} % % Notice that at each step, $deg(f_i)$ halves. \vspace{30px} \paragraph{Proof generation} \emph{(Commitment phase)} P starts from $f(x)$, and for $i=0$ sets $f_0(x)=f(x)$. \begin{enumerate} \item $\forall~i \in \{0, log(d)\}$, with $d = deg~f(x)$,\\ P computes $f_i^L(x),~ f_i^R(x)$ for which \begin{equation}\tag{eq. $A_i$} f_i(x) = f_i^L(x^2) + x f_i^R(x^2) \end{equation} holds. \item V sends challenge $\alpha_i \in \mathbb{F}$ \item P commits to the random linear combination $f_{i+1}$, for \begin{equation}\tag{eq. $B_i$} f_{i+1}(x) = f_i^L(x) + \alpha_i f_i^R(x) \end{equation} \item P sets $f_i(x) := f_{i+1}(x)$ and starts again the iteration. \end{enumerate} Notice that at each step, $deg(f_i)$ halves. This is done until the last step, where $f_i^L(x),~ f_i^R(x)$ are constant (degree 0 polynomials). For which P does not commit but gives their values directly to V. \emph{(Query phase)} P would receive a challenge $z \in D$ set by V (where $D$ is the evaluation domain, $D \in \mathbb{F}$), and P would open the commitments at $\{z^{2^i}, -z^{2^i}\}$ for each step $i$. (Recall, "opening" means that would provide a proof (MerkleProof) of it). \paragraph{Data sent from P to V} \begin{itemize} \item[] Commitments: $\{Comm(f_i)\}_0^{log(d)}$\\ {\scriptsize eg. $\{Comm(f_0),~ Comm(f_1),~ Comm(f_2),~ ...,~ Comm(f_{log(d)})\}$ } \item[] Openings: $\{ f_i(z^{2^i}),~f_i(-(z^{2^i})) \}_0^{log(d)}$\\ for a challenge $z \in D$ set by V\\ {\scriptsize eg. $f_0(z),~ f_0(-z),~ f_1(z^2),~ f_1(-z^2),~ f_2(z^4),~ f_2(-z^4),~ f_3(z^8),~ f_3(-z^8),~ \ldots$} \item[] Constant values of last iteration: $\{f_k^L,~f_k^R\}$, for $k=log(d)$ \end{itemize} % \begin{figure}[htp] % \centering % \begin{footnotesize} % \begin{sequencediagram} % \newinst[0]{p}{Prover} % \newinst[5]{v}{Verifier} % % \mess{p}{$\{Comm(f_i)\}_0^{log(d)},~ \{f_i(z^{2^i}),~f_i(-(z^{2^i})) \}_0^{log(d)},~ \{f_k^L,~ f_k^R\}$}{v} % % \end{sequencediagram} % \end{footnotesize} % \caption[FRI-LDT]{sketch of the FRI-LDT flow} % \label{fig:fri-ldt} % \end{figure} \paragraph{Verification} V receives: \begin{align*} \text{Commitments:}~ &Comm(f_i),~ \forall i \in \{0, log(d)\}\\ \text{Openings:}~ &\{o_i, o_i'\}=\{ f_i(z^{2^i}),~f_i(-(z^{2^i})) \},~ \forall i \in \{0, log(d)\}\\ \text{Constant vals:}~ &\{f_k^L,~f_k^R\} \end{align*} \vspace{20px} For all $i \in \{0, log(d)\}$, V knows the openings at $z^{2^i}$ and $-(z^{2^i})$ for\\ $Comm(f_i(x))$, which are $o_i=f_i(z^{2^i})$ and $o_i'=f_i(-(z^{2^i}))$ respectively. V, from (eq. $A_i$), knows that $$f_i(x)=f_i^L(x^2) + x f_i^R(x^2)$$ should hold, thus $$f_i(z)=f_i^L(z^2) + z f_i^R(z^2)$$ where $f_i(z)$ is known, but $f_i^L(z^2),~f_i^R(z^2)$ are unknown. But, V also knows the value for $f_i(-z)$, which can be represented as $$f_i(-z)=f_i^L(z^2) - z f_i^R(z^2)$$ (note that when replacing $x$ by $-z$, it loses the negative in the power, not in the linear combination). Thus, we have the system of independent linear equations \begin{align*} % TODO add braces on left f_i(z)&=f_i^L(z^2) + z f_i^R(z^2)\\ f_i(-z)&=f_i^L(z^2) - z f_i^R(z^2) \end{align*} for which V will find the value of $f_i^L(z^{2^i}),~f_i^R(z^{2^i})$. Equivalently it can be represented by $$ \begin{pmatrix} 1 & z\\ 1 & -z \end{pmatrix} \begin{pmatrix} f_i^L(z^2)\\ f_i^R(z^2) \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} f_i(z)\\ f_i(-z) \end{pmatrix} $$ where V will find the values of $f_i^L(z^{2^i}),~f_i^R(z^{2^i})$ being \begin{align*} f_i^L(z^{2^i})=\frac{f_i(z) + f_i(-z)}{2}\\ f_i^R(z^{2^i})=\frac{f_i(z) - f_i(-z)}{2z}\\ \end{align*} Once, V has computed $f_i^L(z^{2^i}),~f_i^R(z^{2^i})$, can use them to compute the linear combination of $$ f_{i+1}(z^{2^i}) = f_i^L(z^{2^i}) + \alpha_i f_i^R(z^{2^i}) $$ obtaining then $f_{i+1}(z^{2^i})$. This comes from (eq. $B_i$). Now, V checks that the obtained $f_{i+1}(z^{2^i})$ is equal to the received opening $o_{i+1}=f_{i+1}(z^{2^i})$ from the commitment done by P. V checks also the commitment of $Comm(f_{i+1}(x))$ for the opening $o_{i+1}=f_{i+1}(z^{2^i})$.\\ If the checks pass, V is convinced that $f_1(x)$ was committed honestly. Now, sets $i := i+1$ and starts a new iteration. For the last iteration, V checks that the obtained $f_i^L(z^{2^i}),~f_i^R(z^{2^i})$ are equal to the constant values $\{f_k^L,~f_k^R\}$ received from P. \vspace{10px} It needs $log(d)$ iterations, and the number of queries (commitments + openings sent and verified) needed is $2 \cdot log(d)$. \subsection{Parameters} P commits to $f_i$ restricted to a subfield $F_0 \subset \mathbb{F}$. Let $0<\rho<1$ be the \emph{rate} of the code, such that $$|F_0| = \rho^{-1} \cdot d$$ \begin{theorem} For $\delta \in (0, 1-\sqrt{\rho})$, we have that if V accepts, then w.v.h.p. (with very high probability) $\Delta(f_0,~ p^d) \leq \delta$. \end{theorem} \section{FRI as polynomial commitment scheme} This section overviews the trick from \cite{cryptoeprint:2019/1020} to convert FRI into a polynomial commitment. Want to check that the evaluation of $f(x)$ at $r$ is $f(r)$, which is equivalent to proving that $\exists ~Q \in \mathbb{F}[x]$ with $deg(Q)=d-1$, such that $$ f(x)-f(r) = Q(x) \cdot (x-r) $$ note that $f(x)-f(r)$ evaluated at $r$ is $0$, so $(x-r) | (f(x)-f(r))$, in other words $(f(x)-f(r))$ is a multiple of $(x-r)$ for a polynomial $Q(x)$. Let us define $g(x) = \frac{f(x)-f(r)}{x-r}$. Prover uses FRI-LDT \ref{sec:fri-ldt} to commit to $g(x)$, and then prove w.v.h.p that $deg(g) \leq d-1$ ($\Longleftrightarrow \Delta(g,~ p^{d-1} \leq \delta$). Prover was already proving that $deg(f) \leq d$. Now, the missing thing to prove is that $g(x)$ has the right shape. We can relate $g$ to $f$ as follows: V does the normal FRI-LDT, but in addition, at the first iteration: V has $f(z)$ and $g(z)$ openings, so can verify $$g(z) = (f(z)-f(r))\cdot (z-r)^{-1}$$ \bibliography{paper-notes.bib} \bibliographystyle{unsrt} \end{document}