International Association
for Cryptologic Research

We propose a novel KZG-based sum-check scheme, dubbed $\mathsf{Losum}$, with \emph{optimal} efficiency. Particularly, its proving cost is \emph{one} multi-scalar-multiplication of size $k$---the number of non-zero entries in the vector, its verification cost is \emph{one} pairing plus one group scalar multiplication, and the proof consists of only \emph{one} group element. Using $\mathsf{Losum}$ as a component, we then construct a new lookup argument, named $\mathsf{Locq}$, which enjoys a smaller proof size and a lower verification cost compared to the state of the arts $\mathsf{cq}$, $\mathsf{cq}$+ and $\mathsf{cq}$++. Specifically, the proving cost of $\mathsf{Locq}$ is comparable to $\mathsf{cq}$, keeping the advantage that the proving cost is independent of the table size after preprocessing. For verification, $\mathsf{Locq}$ costs four pairings, while $\mathsf{cq}$, $\mathsf{cq}$+ and $\mathsf{cq}$++ require five, five and six pairings, respectively. For proof size, a $\mathsf{Locq}$ proof consists of four $\mathbb{G}_1$ elements and one $\mathbb{G}_2$ element; when instantiated with the BLS12-381 curve, the proof size of $\mathsf{Locq}$ is $2304$ bits, while $\mathsf{cq}$, $\mathsf{cq}$+ and $\mathsf{cq}$++ have $3840$, $3328$ and $2944$ bits, respectively. Moreover, $\mathsf{Locq}$ is zero-knowledge as $\mathsf{cq}$+ and $\mathsf{cq}$++, whereas $\mathsf{cq}$ is not. $\mathsf{Locq}$ is more efficient even compared to the non-zero-knowledge (and more efficient) versions of $\mathsf{cq}$+ and $\mathsf{cq}$++.

Zero-Knowledge Virtual Machines (ZKVMs) have gained traction in recent years due to their potential applications in a variety of areas, particularly blockchain ecosystems. Despite tremendous progress on ZKVMs in the industry, no formal definitions or security proofs have been established in the literature. Due to this lack of formalization, existing protocols exhibit significant discrepancies in terms of problem definitions and performance metrics, making it difficult to analyze and compare these advancements, or to trust the security of the increasingly complex ZKVM implementations. In this work, we focus on random-access memory, an influential and expensive component of ZKVMs. Specifically, we investigate the state-of-the-art protocols for validating the correct functioning of memory, which we refer to as the \emph{memory consistency checks}. Isolating these checks from the rest of the system allows us to formalize their definition and security notion. Furthermore, we summarize the state-of-the-art constructions using the Polynomial IOP model and formally prove their security. Observing that the bottleneck of existing designs lies in sorting the entire memory trace, we break away from this paradigm and propose a novel memory consistency check, dubbed $\mathsf{Permem}$. $\mathsf{Permem}$ bypasses this bottleneck by introducing a technique called the address cycle method, which requires fewer building blocks and---after instantiating the building blocks with state-of-the-art constructions---fewer online polynomial oracles and evaluation queries. In addition, we propose $\mathsf{gcq}$, a new construction for the lookup argument---a key building block of the memory consistency check, which costs fewer online polynomial oracles than the state-of-the-art construction $\mathsf{cq}$.

This paper proposes new Polynomial IOPs for arithmetic circuits. They rely on the monomial coefficient basis to represent the matrices and vectors arising from the arithmetic constraint satisfaction system, and build on new protocols for establishing the correct computation of linear algebra relations such as matrix-vector products and Hadamard products. Our protocols give rise to concrete proof systems with succinct verification when compiled down with a cryptographic compiler whose role is abstracted away in this paper. Depending only on the compiler, the resulting SNARKs are either transparent or rely on a trusted setup.