Score:0

Looking for the proof of the prod check gadget referred to by Boneh in his PLONK video

et flag

I am going through Dan Boneh's video tutorial on PLONK Polynomial IOPs - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxyoPM2m7Yg

He describes 3 type of proof gadgets he will use Proof Gadgets

He gives a proof of the Zero Test which I understood. However, he doesn't cover the proof for the Sum Check & Product Check in his video.

Prod Check

Prove that $\prod_{a \in H} f(a) = c$

He says that has Product Check covered in his slides - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1CMAoUSBl5vN8u88-ud_OJaCI9uBWABXG/view

But I don't find it covered even in the slides.

I found another set of Boneh slides which does have it - https://zk-learning.org/assets/lecture5-2023.pdf (Page 26 on)

This has the following 4 slides on Prod Check (it's a little different $f(a) = 1$ instead of $f(a) = c$)

Prod Check Slides

But it still is very difficult to understand just from the slide without any explanation

For e.g. I don't understand how in the first of the 4 slides itself, he gets

$t(\omega^{k-1}) = \prod_{a \in \Omega} f(a) = 1$

And in the next line

$t(\omega \cdot X) = t(x)\cdot f(\omega \cdot X)$

Again, it's not even clear what the two different x's are

I googled & looked through several videos & documents on PLONK including the original PLONK document but I can't find this covered anywhere.

Does anyone know where I can read up more on this?

Score:1
gd flag

maybe the lecture video on youtube can help you to understand: https://youtu.be/LbpPCN-f_XA?t=952

BTW, the equation in the first of 4 slides you don't understand is just stating the hypothesis in the form of auxiliary polynomial t

mangohost

Post an answer

Most people don’t grasp that asking a lot of questions unlocks learning and improves interpersonal bonding. In Alison’s studies, for example, though people could accurately recall how many questions had been asked in their conversations, they didn’t intuit the link between questions and liking. Across four studies, in which participants were engaged in conversations themselves or read transcripts of others’ conversations, people tended not to realize that question asking would influence—or had influenced—the level of amity between the conversationalists.