It's nice how @feltroidPrime adding more and more zk-proofs support for the StarkNet. Circom, Noir, risc0, and Sp1 verifiers make the @Starknet a verification layer. We have implemented sp1 and risc0 verifiers for o1js that developers can use

RT @nori_zk: 🚀 Big milestone for Nori!.We’re now continuously verifying & committing Ethereum’s latest execution state root on Mina Devnet,….

Join millions who have switched to Grok.

RT @powdr_labs: We are excited to share that 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑑𝑟 labs is now an independent organization focused on the next generation of ZK tooling, se….

Congrats @DootFoundation and @damla_sehnaz on the launch of the website (love the motion design in the opening).

RT @damla_sehnaz: 🚀 Excited to share that I’ve designed the website of @DootFoundation a blockchain oracle for @MinaProtocol 🌐. I hope thi….

RT @o1_labs: You’re only as strong as your contributing community 💪 .The foundational work for the Mina+Celestia integration was an open-so….

RT @kobigurk: Thank you indeed!. We got some inspiration from your prototypes.

RT @MinaProtocol: This integration will streamline the building process for developers while making it easier to launch customizable and sc….

RT @MinaProtocol: Mina zkApps with Celestia underneath ✨. @CelestiaOrg’s modular data availability layer is coming to Mina Protocol, enabli….

Happy to see that my research/implementation and prototype that I provided here and thoughts in MIP (Mina Improvement Proposal) related to DA ( helped more experienced teams to implement the solution.

I added an example proving Poseidon Hash using the Goldilocks field in Plonky3 merged into the repository. You can see the benchmark by running the example.

Nova: R1CS-based folding scheme, Sangria: Nova for PLONKish circuits. Is there any AIR-based folding scheme?.

Then, we can have a final check of "accumulated polynomials" by checking the random linear combinations of both polynomials =? the same linear combinations of commitments to corresponding polynomials. (for a non-interactive SNARK, this randomness created by Fiat-Shamir).

Since both "polynomial commitment which will be used needs to be" and "every polynomial is" additively homomorphic. We can aggregate the pairs from (polynomial_1, commitment_to_polynomial_1) to (polynomial_n, commitment_to_polynomial_n).

The idea here is the following. Let's say we have "n" proofs which will be used in a recursive snark. A pair is (polynomial_i, commitment_to_polynomial_i) for proof_i, where i = 1, . , n.

This requires the polynomial commitment scheme of the SNARK which is going to be used in the recursive SNARK composition to be "additively homomorphic" (i.e. f(x) + f(y) = f(x + y)).

Halo ( is the paper that brings the idea of "accumulation schemes" as deferring the expensive verification step in recursive SNARKs by aggregating the heavy-computational opening polynomial commitment schemes and verifying it at once.

It's really good to see that I am on the same list as Eurocrypt (@IACReurocrypt) by implementing a Groth16 Verifier in fe-lang.

** recursive proof "composition".

the trusted-setup (as we don't need to use Groth16 to have an O(1) verifier complexity and increase our SNARK scope) in a recursive proof computation.