MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414869624 · doi:10.62056/angy11fgx

zkMaP: Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Matrix Multiplication Proofs

2025· article· en· W4414869624 on OpenAlexaff
Biniyam Deressa, M.A. Hasan

Bibliographic record

VenueIACR Communications in Cryptology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCryptography and Data Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematical proofMatrix multiplicationReduction (mathematics)Multiplication (music)ScalabilityMatrix (chemical analysis)SpeedupPairing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce zkMaP (Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-Interactive Matrix Multiplication Proofs), a novel non-interactive zero-knowledge proof system for verifying matrix multiplication with significant improvements in efficiency and scalability. Our protocol leverages KZG polynomial commitments and an innovative inner-product reduction technique to reduce the verification of n x n matrix multiplication to a single pairing equation, thereby enabling constant-time verification independent of the matrix size. In particular, zkMaP requires only two pairing operations and produces proofs as small as 320 bytes, yielding a 96 percent reduction in proof size compared to prior schemes. Furthermore, the prover's computational complexity follows the state-of-the-art at O(n^2), with experimental results demonstrating that proofs for 1024 x 1024 matrices can be generated in approximately 12.21 seconds, offering a 16.14x speedup over previous methods. Our implementation also exhibits better memory efficiency, using only 24.58 MB of prover-side RAM for 1024 x 1024 matrices, and supports scalable batch processing, achieving per-proof generation times of 46.79 milliseconds for 1024 instances while maintaining a constant verification time of 3.6 ms.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.793
Threshold uncertainty score0.835

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.345 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIACR Communications in CryptologySame topicCryptography and Data SecurityFrench-language works237,207