mirror of
https://github.com/lux-apps/papers.git
synced 2026-10-30 18:15:21 +00:00
zeekay
abf99d05fc
Restructured from flat .tex/.pdf files into per-paper subdirectories. Added Antje Worring as co-author on all papers. Synced PDFs to pdfs/ for download site.
44 lines
2.2 KiB
TeX
44 lines
2.2 KiB
TeX
\section{Related Work}
|
|
|
|
\label{sec:related}
|
|
%% ============================================================================
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{Fraud Proofs and DA.}
|
|
Al-Bassam et al.~\cite{albassam2018fraud} introduced the data availability problem for
|
|
light clients and proposed erasure coding with fraud proofs. Their construction uses
|
|
one-dimensional coding with Merkle commitments. Lux-DAS extends this to 2D coding with
|
|
algebraic (KZG) commitments, eliminating the need for fraud proofs of incorrect coding.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{Celestia.}
|
|
LazyLedger~\cite{albassam2019lazyledger}, now Celestia~\cite{celestia2023}, implements
|
|
a dedicated DA layer with 2D RS coding and Namespaced Merkle Trees. Lux-DAS differs in
|
|
using KZG commitments (constant-size proofs), appchain-scoped aggregation, and integration
|
|
with Beacon consensus.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{EIP-4844 and Danksharding.}
|
|
Ethereum's blob transaction format~\cite{eip4844} introduces KZG-committed blobs but does
|
|
not implement DAS in the current protocol. Full Danksharding~\cite{dankrad2022danksharding}
|
|
proposes 2D DAS with distributed block building; Lux-DAS shares the 2D KZG approach but
|
|
adds multi-chain namespace support.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{Avail.}
|
|
Avail~\cite{avail2023} provides a standalone DA layer with KZG commitments and application-
|
|
specific data namespaces. Lux-DAS integrates DA directly into the consensus layer rather
|
|
than operating as a separate chain.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{EigenDA.}
|
|
EigenDA~\cite{eigenda2023} leverages restaked ETH for DA guarantees with KZG commitments
|
|
dispersed across operators. Lux-DAS achieves similar goals natively within the Lux validator
|
|
set without requiring a separate restaking layer.
|
|
|
|
\paragraph{Post-Quantum Considerations.}
|
|
KZG commitments rely on the hardness of discrete logarithm in pairing groups, which is
|
|
vulnerable to quantum attack. We note that the Lux-DAS commitment structure is modular:
|
|
replacing KZG with a hash-based or lattice-based polynomial commitment scheme (e.g.,
|
|
FRI~\cite{ben2018fast} or lattice-based schemes~\cite{peikert2019noninteractive}) requires
|
|
changing only the \texttt{CommitmentScheme} interface. We leave post-quantum DAS as future
|
|
work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
%% ============================================================================
|