-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Small fixes #18
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Small fixes #18
Conversation
@@ -1566,9 +1566,9 @@ | |||
|
|||
But for the case $600 = 10 \times 10 \times 6$ - we first ``chunk'' in 10s, then | |||
again in 10s, leaving only 6 components for the final step. That | |||
requires revealing $2\times 10-1 = 19$ commitments at each of the two reducing | |||
requires revealing $2\times (10 - 2) = 18$ commitments at each of the two reducing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess we can clarify this and the next bit of arithmetic via #19 but also 2 x (10-2) is not 18 :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My true (in)ability is exposed!
@@ -1863,7 +1863,7 @@ | |||
receive back a challenge $x$, both sides recalculate $C'$, continue until a | |||
final step (each step a halving and a new $L, R$), and in the last step reveal | |||
scalars for the now single values $a, b$, and the Verifier makes the final | |||
check that $C^{*} = a^{*}b^{*}G + a^{*}G_1 + b^{*}H_1$, where * indicates the $\log_2n$-th transformed values. | |||
check that $C^{*} = (a^{*} \cdot b^{*})G + a^{*}G_1 + b^{*}H_1$, where * indicates the $\log_2n$-th transformed values. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I believe these are now single values not vectors (as per previous line), so we don't want a dot product here. Admittedly it does look really crappy using a * superscript here, though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You're right. When I was first reading this, I thought the protocol could end on vectors of length 2, for which you would need the dot product. I think the number of messages stays the same, but I think I invented that out of thin air.
@@ -2143,7 +2143,7 @@ | |||
can see that this requires: | |||
\begin{align*} | |||
& \textbf{H}' = \textbf{y}^{-n}\textbf{H} \\ | |||
& P = A + xS -zG + \left(z\textbf{y}^n + z^2\textbf{2}^n\right)\textbf{H}' \\ | |||
& P = A + xS -z\textbf{G} + \left(z\textbf{y}^n + z^2\textbf{2}^n\right)\textbf{H}' \\ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
z is committed to via a single generator G. Whereas the vector (bolded)G is used as a shorthand. See eqns (2), (3), (4) earlier on.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you might be confusing the inner product proof (which has zG
) with the range proof (which has z\vec{G}
). We need z\vec{G}
to extract a_L
and a_R
(see "Then consider coefficients of G:").
Thanks for this review work :) It's been many years so forgive me if I struggle sometimes to answer/address points here and there :) |
These are small errors / oddities that I noticed while going through the document. Great work, by the way.