Proving system¶

Warning

TODO: add efficiency expectations (what to prioritise)

The resource machine differentiates between three kinds of proofs, each of which can have a distinct proving system used to produce that sort of proofs:

resource logic proofs
compliance proofs
delta proofs

	Execution context	Constraints defined by	Are the constraints public by default?	Meaning
Resource logic proof	Action	Application	No	Action is compliant with the application constraints
Compliance proof	Compliance unit	RM instance	Yes	Action (partitioned into compliance units) is compliant with the RM rules
Delta proof	Transaction	RM interface	Yes	Transaction is balanced

Proving system requirements¶

The first two kinds of proofs, resource logic proofs and compliance proofs, follow the standard proving system interface defined here. The delta proof has an additional functionality required and is further described here.

Resource logic proving system choice¶

Resource logic proof is the most common proof type. Each action that modifies the state of n resources (creates or consumes) has at least n resource logic proofs attached to it. In principle, the predicate checked with each proof can be different for all n proofs. For that reason, the proving system of choice should support easy proof instantiation process for new predicates (e.g., a SNARK that requires a trusted setup ceremony initiated for every predicate is probably not the most efficient choice for this proving system).

Compliance proving system choice¶

Compliance constraints are fixed per RM instantiation, meaning that the predicate being checked is the same for each compliance unit, with only the instance and witness being different each time. For that reason, a proving system that prioritises efficiency for a single predicate over the ease of creating proofs for new predicates might be more suitable.

Proving system hierarchy¶

The diagram below describes the relationships between the proving system and delta proof interfaces and their instantiations that correspond to the proving system for each proof type.

---
title: Proving System hierarchy
---
classDiagram
    class IProvingSystem~VerifyingKey, ProvingKey, Instance, Witness, Proof~ {
         <<Interface>>
         +prove(ProvingKey, Instance, Witness) Proof
         +verify(VerifyingKey, Instance, Proof) Bool
    }

    IProvingSystem <|-- ResourceLogicProvingSystem
    IProvingSystem <|-- ComplianceProvingSystem
    IProvingSystem <|-- IDeltaProvingSystem

    class ResourceLogicProvingSystem
    class ComplianceProvingSystem

    class IDeltaProvingSystem~VerifyingKey, ProvingKey, Instance, Witness, Proof~ {
         <<Interface>>
        +aggregate(Proof, Proof) Proof
    }
    IDeltaProvingSystem <|-- DeltaProvingSystem

    class DeltaProvingSystem