Files
papers/ntt-transform/sections/08-benchmark-results.tex
zeekay 0d1d121451 papers: cover-consistency + build pass on Hanzo Tier-2/3 catalogue
Fix shared/ include paths to ../shared/ for 55 subdirectory papers so
that hanzocover.sty and lstlang.tex resolve when building from each
paper's own directory (the build pattern used by latexmk per paper).

Build fixes:
- hanzo-operative/sections/03-screen-understanding-pipeline.tex: move
  \COMMENT from after \FOR{...} onto the \STATE line so the algorithmic
  env doesn't mis-parse.
- hanzo-network-architecture (abstract + sections 04, 12, 13): escape
  unicode mu (U+03BC) as $\mu$ for pdflatex.
- ntt-transform/sections/08-benchmark-results.tex: same mu escape.

All 55 Tier-2/3 papers now build clean with latexmk -pdf.
2026-05-13 01:11:04 -07:00

61 lines
1.4 KiB
TeX
Raw Permalink Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
\section{Benchmark Results}
\subsection{Comprehensive Performance Metrics}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{NTT Operation Benchmarks}
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
Operation & Size & Gas Cost & Time (ms) \\
\midrule
NTT-256 & 256 & 580K & 58 \\
NTT-512 & 512 & 1.2M & 120 \\
NTT-1024 & 1024 & 2.8M & 280 \\
NTT-2048 & 2048 & 6.5M & 650 \\
\midrule
INTT-256 & 256 & 610K & 61 \\
INTT-512 & 512 & 1.3M & 130 \\
INTT-1024 & 1024 & 3.0M & 300 \\
INTT-2048 & 2048 & 6.9M & 690 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Algorithm-Specific Benchmarks}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Complete Verification Benchmarks}
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
Algorithm & Original & Optimized & Reduction \\
\midrule
FALCON-512 verify & 24M & 3.6M & 85\% \\
Dilithium-2 verify & 21M & 3.8M & 82\% \\
Dilithium-3 verify & 22M & 4.1M & 81\% \\
STARK verify (64K) & 45M & 15M & 67\% \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Comparison with Native Implementations}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{EVM vs Native Performance Ratio}
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
Operation & Native ($\mu$s) & EVM (ms) & Overhead \\
\midrule
NTT-512 & 50 & 120 & 2,400× \\
FALCON verify & 200 & 350 & 1,750× \\
Dilithium verify & 250 & 400 & 1,600× \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
While EVM overhead remains significant, our optimizations bring post-quantum cryptography within practical limits.