Living notes for Proofs of Space Constructions - Anca,Carla,Leo,Matteo

Things we agreed to explore:

• NSE
• Motivation: there has been significant amount of time spent on this so it makes sense to explore
• Goal: understand NSE, what’s been done, evaluate limitations
• Timeline
May 4th we are looking at the construction in a meeting
1. By May 11th, write down the challenges we understood are there for NSE
• Questions:
• How much tunability would NSE give you? How?
• Ideal example of tunability: We want to upgrade hardness a notch and you just provide a new proof of hardness upgrade without doing the whole sealing/unsealing again.
• To understand: how much do sealing and unsealing have to be costly (latency vs cost model) (is asymmetry ever possible? It is for example possible in the cost model)
• Analysis of SDR
• Timeline: within May, if other approaches are not promising. Otherwise this is in the background
• Q: do Luca and Irene feel there is room for improvement?
• Use of VDF to compress rounds
• Other cost assumptions:
• Motivation for some of these approaches is that they may need no SNARK (take for example VC with aggregatable features) and they may yield different security for the provider (compared to SDR, for example)
Clarify this a non graph-based approach. Let’s expand how it would work
Goal: make a doc of pros/cons of each. Table is an option with pros/cons
1. VC
2. MSMs (aleo-style)
3. VDF (NB: different than the use of VDF above)

Tunability and what can be improved in PoS.