The Rosario-Wang Proof

Eni6ma Technology and the Rosario-Wang Proof/Cypher is Patent Pending. USPTO 2024. Copyright 2024 All right reserved. Eni6ma.org - Dylan Rosario

---

The Rosario-Wang Proofs, are a comprehensive suite of mathematical proofs across various methodologies including [1] Direct, Probabilistic via Induction, Accumulation of results, and proof by Contradiction, which collectively underscore the multifaceted rigor and robustness embedded in the cryptographic protocol $Π$. At the core of these proofs lies the objective of $Π$ to authenticate a sequence $P$ through a meticulous process of verification against a dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$ across numerous rounds. The direct proof initiates this exploration by asserting the fundamental logic and operational structure of $Π$, demonstrating how the accumulator $Λ$ signifies the complete authentication of $P$ when every element $p_i$ is verified within its assigned subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds. This proof not only highlights $Π$'s thorough authentication process but also its capacity to safeguard the integrity and authenticity of $P$.

Building on this foundation, the probabilistic proof via induction introduces a layer of complexity by weaving in the principles of probability and mathematical induction. It posits that with each subsequent round, the likelihood of $Λ$ accurately representing the authentication of $P$ markedly increases, presupposing a verification process characterized by security and impartiality. This aspect of the Rosario-Wang Proofs illustrates the dynamic and adaptable nature of $Π$'s verification mechanism, emphasizing its capability to consistently authenticate sequences amidst a landscape marked by variability and uncertainty.

The accumulation of results proof further solidifies the authentication framework of $Π$ by meticulously analyzing how $Λ$, through the logical aggregation ($\bigwedge$) of all verification outcomes $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$, serves as an unequivocal metric of $P$'s authentication across all rounds. This proof methodically navigates through $Π$'s verification process, affirming that the truth of $Λ$ is a comprehensive reflection of successful individual verifications and, by extension, the holistic authentication of $P$ within $Π$'s verification spectrum.

Complementing these proofs, the proof by contradiction employs a logical exploration of potential contradictions to reinforce the theorem that $Λ$ truthfully signifies $P$'s authentication. By examining hypothetical scenarios where $Λ$ could misrepresent the authentication status of $P$, this proof navigates through logical inconsistencies to affirm the original theorem's validity, thereby highlighting the coherence and structural integrity of $Π$'s verification system.

Together, these proofs constitute a detailed validation framework for $Π$, offering a nuanced perspective on its approach to sequence authentication. From establishing the foundational logic and operational integrity to exploring probabilistic certainties and addressing potential logical contradictions, the Rosario-Wang Proofs not only substantiate $Π$'s theoretical and practical reliability but also underscore its innovative contributions to the realm of cryptographic authentication. Through this comprehensive proof suite, $Π$ is demonstrated to authenticate sequences with a high degree of certainty, security, and adaptability, reflecting its significance within the cryptographic landscape.

The disclosed proofs within this chapter offer a detailed validation framework utilizing the following methods :

Shuffling Function ($\Sigma$): By mapping a static alphabet $A$ onto a shuffled alphabet $X^R$ for each round $R$, ensuring each verification round has a unique configuration.

$$\quad \Sigma: A \rightarrow X^R$$

Subset Indication ($\Omega$): For every element $p_i$ in the sequence $P$, a specific subset $x_i^R$ within $X^R$ is identified for verification purposes, establishing the basis for each element's validation.

$$\quad M(p_i) = x_i^R$$

Element Verification ($M$): The verification function $M$ assesses whether each element $p_i$ is correctly located within its designated subset $x_i^R$, with verification success explicitly contingent upon the element's presence within the subset.

$$\quad M(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} \iff p_i \in x_i^R$$

Result Accumulation ($\Lambda$): Aggregates the outcomes of all verification efforts across rounds through logical conjunction, encapsulating the collective success of element verifications.

$$\quad \Lambda = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} M(p_i, x_i^R)$$

Probabilistic Result Accumulation ($\Lambda_{\text{new}}$): Enhances the accumulation process by considering the probability of each verification's success, factoring in the conditions and round-specific contexts, thereby offering a nuanced view of the verification integrity.

$$\quad \Lambda_{\text{new}} = \prod_{R=1}^{n} \Pr(M(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} | x_i^R, R)$$

Authentication Conclusion ($K \Leftrightarrow \Lambda$): Establishes the final authentication status of $P$, equating the proof of knowledge ($K$) directly with the truth of the accumulated verification results ($\Lambda$), thereby affirming the sequence's authentication when the verification process consistently succeeds across all rounds.

$$\quad K \Leftrightarrow \Lambda$$

The given equations form a comprehensive mathematical framework for a cryptographic protocol, detailing the process from initial setup through to the final verification outcome:. Together, these equations systematically articulate the protocol's methodology for authenticating a sequence $P$ against a dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$, incorporating both deterministic and probabilistic elements to ensure rigorous and comprehensive sequence authentication.

Description of Π

Given:

• A static alphabet $A$,

• A sequence $P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$ designated for authentication,

• A per-round uniquely shuffled alphabet $X^R = Σ(A)$, and

• A verification procedure for elements $p_i \in P$ against subsets $x_i^R \subseteq X^R$.

Operations and Verification Logic:

1. Shuffling:

   • For each verification round $R$, $A$ undergoes transformation into a shuffled variant $X^R$ via $Σ$, where $Σ: A \rightarrow X^R$, imbuing each round with distinctiveness.

2. Subset Indication:

   • The indicating function $Ω$, for each $p_i$, delineates the subset $x_i^R$ within $X^R$ designated for $p_i$'s verification, forming the verification challenge foundation for round $R$. Thus, $Ω(p_i) = x_i^R$.

3. Element Verification:

   • Verification of $p_i$'s inclusion within $x_i^R$ is executed via $Μ$, where $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ iff $p_i$ is ascertained within $x_i^R$.

4. Result Accumulation:

   • Cumulative verification over all rounds $R$ is consolidated by $Λ$, the logical conjunction of all verification results: $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$.

5. Authentication Outcome:

   • Authentication of $P$ against $X^R$ throughout all rounds is affirmed iff $Λ = \text{true}$, succinctly represented as $Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$.

This refined algebraic framework for $Π$ encapsulates the dynamic verification and authentication schema, highlighting from sequence preparation through verification results accumulation, culminating in the definitive authentication outcome.

To accurately reflect the comprehensive structure and the mathematical rigor of the multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony ($Π$), the description integrates our established axioms, lemmas, constraints, principles, and systemic implications:

Definition of System

1. Initialization of the Protocol ($Π$): The protocol $Π$ commences with an interactive, multi-round challenge-response proof ceremony, aiming to authenticate a sequence $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$ against a dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$, originating from a static set $A$.

2. Preparation of the Alphabet ($A$) and Shuffled Alphabet ($X^R$): The static alphabet $A$ forms the base. Each round $R$ within $Π$ employs the shuffling function $Σ$ to randomize $A$, producing $X^R$, ensuring unique configurations per round to bolster unpredictability.

3. Generation and Verification of the Sequence ($P$): Constructed from indexed elements of $A$, the sequence $P$ undergoes authentication. For each round $R$, a target subset $x_i^R \subseteq X^R$ is identified for verifying $p_i$, directed by the witness function $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$.

4. Witness and Random Distribution per Round ($Ω$ and $Σ$): The authenticator, via $Ω$, specifies the subset $x_i^R$ anticipated to enclose $p_i$. The operation $Σ$ delineates the process for random distribution of $A$ into $X^R$, further partitioning it into subsets for each round $R$, thereby ensuring procedural randomness and integrity.

5. Membership Verification per Round ($Μ$) and Result Accumulation ($Λ$): Every round $R$ leverages the verification condition $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ to determine $p_i$'s presence in $x_i^R$, as indicated by $Ω$. The aggregation of these verification results is orchestrated by $Λ$, requiring all verifications ($Μ$) to affirmatively confirm $p_i$'s correct placement for the proof $Κ$ to be authenticated.

6. Conclusion of the Protocol with Proof of Knowledge ($Κ$): The protocol $Π$ culminates in the establishment of proof $Κ$, which attains validation solely if $Λ$, representing the cumulative verification results, substantiates each $p_i$ of $P$ within the apt subset $x_i^R$ throughout all rounds $R$. This validation process underscores the authenticator's exhaustive comprehension and precise allocation of $P$ within $X^R$, evidenced by uniform verifications.

7. Security and Integrity of the Protocol: The foundational security and structural integrity of $Π$ are safeguarded by the algorithmic shuffling of $X^R$ ($Σ$), the diligent execution of membership verification ($Μ$) at each phase, and the comprehensive collection of verification outcomes ($Λ$). This framework, emphasizing the variability of subsets $x_i^R$ and the imperative for unbroken verification across rounds, constructs a formidable safeguard against unauthorized access or manipulative breaches, ensuring the protocol's robustness and reliability.

Description of the The Rosario-Wang Proofs

Summary of the Direct Proof

The direct proof concerning the Rosario-Wang Proofs establishes that the accumulator $Λ$ precisely encapsulates the comprehensive authentication of a sequence $P$ across all verification rounds $R$ in the protocol $Π$. Given the foundational elements such as the static alphabet $A$, sequence $P$, shuffling function $Σ$, indicating function $Ω$, and verification condition $Μ$, the proof methodically demonstrates how $Λ$, through logical conjunction of all verification outcomes, signifies the universal authentication success of $P$. It argues that if $Λ$ is true, then every element $p_i$ of $P$ has been successfully authenticated within its respective subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds, signifying the theorem's validity and $Π$'s efficacy in secure and rigorous sequence authentication.

$$Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

Stating that the accumulator $Λ$ is the result of performing a logical AND operation ($\bigwedge$) over all verification results $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ for each element $p_i$ within its specified subset $x_i^R$ across all rounds $R$ from 1 to $n$.

.

Summary of the Probabilistic Proof via Induction

The probabilistic proof via induction explores the increasing likelihood of the sequence $P$'s authentication across rounds within $Π$, underpinned by probabilistic conditions. Starting with an assumption for a high probability of successful verification in the base case $R=1$, it extends this logic through mathematical induction to all rounds, asserting that $Λ$'s accuracy in reflecting $P$'s authentication approaches certainty as rounds increase. This proof leverages the inherent security and fairness of the verification process $Μ$ and shuffling function $Σ$, suggesting that with each successive round, the probability that $Λ$ correctly signifies $P$'s comprehensive authentication nears absolute certainty, thus illustrating $Π$'s dynamic and robust verification mechanism.

1. Probability of success in round $R=1$:

$$P(\text{success in } R=1) = p$$

2. Cumulative probability from $R=1$ to $R=k+1$:

$$P(\text{success up to } R=k+1) = P(\text{success up to } R=k) \cdot P(\text{success in } R=k+1)$$

Notably, since $P(\text{success in } R=k+1) = p$ due to the independence of rounds, this can also be simplified to:

$$P(\text{success up to } R=k+1) = P(\text{success up to } R=k) \cdot p$$

3. Probability that $Λ$ accurately reflects authentication of $P$:

$$P(Λ = \text{true}) = \lim_{n \to \infty} \prod_{R=1}^{n} p$$

Assuming each round's success is independent and identically distributed, this reflects the increasing certainty of authentication with an increasing number of rounds, given the initial probability of success $p$ is greater than $0.5$. .

Summary of the Accumulation of Results Proof of $Λ$

The Accumulation of Results Proof for $Λ$ rigorously illustrates how the accumulator $Λ$, through its nuanced definition as the product of conditional probabilities of verification outcomes $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$, serves as a nuanced indicator of the sequence $P$'s authentication within the protocol $Π$. This proof methodologically explores how $Λ_{\text{new}} = \prod_{R=1}^{n} \Pr(Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} | x_i^R, R)$ encapsulates the comprehensive verification success across all rounds $R$, introducing a probability-based perspective to the verification process. It asserts that if $Λ_{\text{new}}$ signifies high probability, it unequivocally demonstrates that each element $p_i$ in $P$ has been authenticated within its appropriate subset $x_i^R$ for every round, embodying the operational core and rigorous verification standards of $Π$. This proof emphasizes the principle that $Λ_{\text{new}}$'s significance extends beyond mere reflection of successful individual verifications; it represents a holistic authentication of $P$ across the entire spectrum of $Π$'s verification mechanism, underpinned by a probabilistic model that captures the varying degrees of verification confidence and integrity.

$$Λ_{\text{new}} = \prod_{R=1}^{n} \Pr(Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} | x_i^R, R)$$

Summary of the Proof by Contradiction

The Proof by Contradiction within the Rosario-Wang Proofs framework leverages the logical underpinnings of contradiction to reinforce the theorem that $Λ$ accurately signifies the sequence $P$'s authentication across all rounds in $Π$. By initially supposing the theorem's negation—where $Λ$ could either falsely represent authentication success or fail to signify authentication despite complete verification—this proof navigates through potential logical inconsistencies that such assumptions would entail. It delves into two hypothetical scenarios: one where $Λ$ is true despite a failure in correct verification for at least one $p_i$, and another where $Λ$ is false despite all $p_i$ being correctly verified. By demonstrating that both scenarios lead to contradictions with the established definitions and operational rules of $Π$, such as the nature of $Μ$ and the logical structure of $Λ$, the proof conclusively affirms the original theorem. This approach not only validates the theorem through the elimination of contradictory premises but also highlights the coherence and logical integrity of $Π$'s verification system, illustrating its robust framework for sequence authentication.

$$\forall R \in \{1, 2, ..., n\}, \forall i: \left( Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \right) \Leftrightarrow \left( Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} \right)$$

Indicating that $Λ$, the accumulator of verification results, is true if and only if, for every round $R$ from 1 to $n$ and for every $i$, the verification condition $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ holds true, signifying that each $p_i$ is correctly verified within its designated subset $x_i^R$.

#1: Direct Proof

---

Given a multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony ($Π$), we construct a Direct Proof of the theorem stating that the effective accumulation of verification results ($Λ$) accurately encapsulates the comprehensive authentication of sequence $P$ across all rounds $R$, underlined by $Π$.

Theorem to Prove

If the conjunction $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ holds true, then the sequence $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$ is authenticated against the dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$ across all rounds $R$. This authentication ensures that the union of all shuffled alphabets $X^R$ across every round $R$ equals $X^R$ for each individual round, represented mathematically as $\bigcup_{R} X^R = \forall R: X^R$.

$$Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

$$P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$$

$$\bigcup_{R} X^R = \text{true} \quad \text{or} \quad \forall R: X^R = \text{true}$$

Given:

In the cryptographic protocol $Π$, $A$ represents a static set of symbols or an alphabet from which the sequence $P$ is constructed. The sequence $P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$ is drawn from $A$ for the purpose of authentication. Through the shuffling function $Σ$, $A$ is shuffled to generate a shuffled alphabet $X^R$ for each round $R$ of the authentication process. The indicating function $Ω$ maps each element $p_i$ of $P$ to a specific subset $x_i^R$ within $X^R$, where $x_i^R$ is a subset of $X^R$, denoted as $x_i^R \subseteq X^R$. The verification condition $Μ$ asserts the presence of $p_i$ within the subset $x_i^R$, with $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow \text{true}$ yielding true if the assertion holds. This comprehensive framework ensures the accurate verification of each element $p_i$ within its designated subset, contributing to the overall authentication process within the protocol $Π$.

$A$: A static set of symbols or alphabet from which $P$ is constructed

$$P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$$

such that $P$ is drawn from $A$ to be authenticated.

$$Σ(A) \rightarrow X^R$$

shuffles $A$ to produce a shuffled alphabet $X^R$ for each round $R$.

$$Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$$

A function indicating the specific subset :

$$x_i^R \subseteq X^R$$

where element $p_i$ should be verified.

$$Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

the verification condition that asserts $p_i$ is present within the subset

$$x_i^R \Rightarrow \text{true}$$

, yielding true if the assertion holds.

Steps:

1. Shuffling and Subset Identification:

   • By the design of $Π$, for each round $R$, $Σ$ shuffles $A$ to generate a unique $X^R$, ensuring no two rounds have identical configurations, which enhances the security against replay attacks and ensures unpredictability.

   • For each $p_i$ in $P$, $Ω$ identifies a specific subset $x_i^R$ within $X^R$ for verification, guided by the operational rules of $Π$.

2. Verification Across Rounds:

   • The verification process $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ is applied to each $p_i$ within its designated subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds $R$. By the assumption that $Λ$ is true, we understand $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ for all $i$ and $R$, meaning every $p_i$ is verified to be correctly positioned within $x_i^R$.

3. Accumulation of Verification Results ($Λ$):

   • $Λ$, as defined, is the logical conjunction ($\bigwedge$) of all verification outcomes $Μ$ across rounds $R$. The truth of $Λ$ implies a universal verification success, signifying that each element $p_i$ of $P$ has been authenticated within its respective subset $x_i^R$ across all rounds.

4. Authentication of $P$:

   • Since $Λ$ is true, and given that $Λ$ represents the accumulation of successful verifications ($Μ$) of $P$ against $X^R$, it logically follows that $P$ has been fully authenticated across the entirety of $Π$'s operational span.

Conclusion:

The truth of $Λ$ unequivocally indicates that the sequence $P$ has been authenticated against the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ in all rounds $R$, thereby confirming the theorem through direct proof. This demonstrates not only the integrity of $Π$'s verification process but also its effectiveness in ensuring the authenticity of $P$ within a cryptographically secure and logically rigorous framework.

.

#2: Probabilistic Proof via Induction

---

The probabilistic proof leveraging mathematical induction offers a compelling argument for the authentication of a sequence $P$ against a shuffled alphabet $X^R$ within the cryptographic protocol $Π$. This approach intricately combines the principles of probability theory with mathematical induction to illustrate the increasing certainty of authentication as the protocol progresses through its rounds. Central to this proof is the assumption that with each round $R$, the verification process $Μ$ applied to elements $p_i$ in $P$ against their designated subsets $x_i^R$ has a high likelihood of success, designated by a probability $p$ greater than 0.5. This foundation ensures that at the outset, even in the initial round $R=1$, the protocol is predisposed towards successful authentication.

By inductively assuming the near-certainty of authentication up to any arbitrary round $k$ and extending this to round $k+1$, the proof effectively demonstrates that the accumulator $Λ_{\text{new}}$, which aggregates the verification results $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ across rounds, becomes an increasingly reliable indicator of $P$'s authentication. This logical progression from the base case through the inductive step underscores not just the efficacy of $Π$ in verifying $P$ but also the role of $Λ_{\text{new}}$ as a metric of comprehensive authentication. The inductive approach highlights the strength of $Π$'s verification mechanism, ensuring that with each additional round, the protocol reinforces the sequence $P$'s integrity against $X^R$, with $Λ_{\text{new}}$ serving as the definitive measure of this continuous authentication process.

Assertion to Prove

The probability that the accumulator $Λ_{\text{new}}$, representing the aggregation of verification results $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$, accurately reflects the comprehensive authentication of sequence $P$ across all rounds $R$, approaches certainty (i.e., probability 1) as the number of rounds $n$ increases, given a sufficiently secure and unbiased verification process.

Base Case (Round $R=1$)

• Assumption: The shuffling function $Σ$ generates $X^1$ from $A$ such that each $p_i$ has an equal and independent chance of being correctly positioned within its designated subset $x_i^1$ for verification.

• Probability: Let $p$ be the probability that $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ for a single round, with $p$ significantly greater than $0.5$ (indicating a higher likelihood of success than failure for each verification).

• Observation: For the base case of $R=1$, if $p$ is high, the likelihood that $Λ_{\text{new}}$ correctly signifies the authentication of $P$ is also high.

Inductive Step (Assuming Truth for $R=k$ to Show for $R=k+1$)

• Inductive Hypothesis: Assume for $R=k$ rounds, the probability of $Λ_{\text{new}}$ accurately representing the authentication of $P$ is very close to 1, given the process's security and unbiased nature.

• Next Round $R=k+1$:

  • When $Σ$ shuffles $A$ to produce $X^{k+1}$, and $Ω$ and $Μ$ operate as defined, the independent probability of successful verification for each $p_i$ remains $p$.

  • The addition of round $k+1$ maintains the probability of success for $Λ_{\text{new}}$ near 1, given the cumulative success from previous rounds and the independent, high probability $p$ of success in each round.

Conclusion from Inductive Step

• By mathematical induction, if $Λ_{\text{new}}$ is likely to accurately reflect $P$'s authentication for $R=1$ and assuming $Λ_{\text{new}}$'s accuracy for $R=k$ leads to its accuracy for $R=k+1$, then $Λ_{\text{new}}$ is highly likely to be true for all rounds $R$, signaling comprehensive authentication of $P$.

---

Probaility over Inductive Rounds

The probabilistic proof for the comprehensive authentication of a sequence $P$ against a dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$ across all rounds ($R$) in the protocol $Π$, we'll employ a strategy that incorporates principles of mathematical induction and probability theory. This approach aims to establish the high likelihood of $P$'s authentication when $Λ$ aggregates positive verification results across all rounds, under the assumption of certain probabilistic conditions.

Formalization of the Probablistic Proof

To formalize a probabilistic proof of the comprehensive authentication of a sequence $P$ across all rounds in the multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony ($Π$), let's define the necessary formulaic sequences and equations. This formulation will rely on establishing a probability model that demonstrates the efficacy of $Λ$ in representing the true authentication of $P$ as the number of rounds $n$ increases.

Given a sufficiently secure and unbiased verification process ensured by $Σ$ and $Μ$, and the probabilistic advantage conferred by $p$, the probabilistic proof via induction confirms that the likelihood of $Λ$ accurately representing the complete authentication of $P$ approaches certainty as the number of rounds increases. This methodological approach not only validates the robustness of $Π$'s verification system but also affirms its capacity to adapt and respond to the dynamic challenges of sequence authentication in a cryptographic context. Through the application of this probabilistic induction proof, $Π$ emerges as a sophisticated and reliable protocol for ensuring the security and authenticity of sequences within a probabilistically modeled framework.

Given Variables and Parameters

• Let $A$ represent the static alphabet.

• Let $P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$ be the sequence to be authenticated.

• Let $X^R = Σ(A)$ denote the shuffled alphabet for round $R$, generated by the shuffling function $Σ$.

• Let $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$ denote the indicating function that specifies the subset within $X^R$ for the verification of $p_i$.

• Let $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ be the binary verification function yielding true if $p_i$ is correctly verified within $x_i^R$.

• Let $p$ represent the probability that $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ for a given $p_i$ in round $R$, with the assumption that $p > 0.5$, indicating a favorable chance of successful verification.

Probabilistic Proof

Theoretical Base Case: $R=1$

• Probability of $Μ(p_i, x_i^1) = \text{true}$ for each $p_i$: $P(\text{success in } R=1) = p$.

Inductive Step: From $R=k$ to $R=k+1$

• Inductive Hypothesis: Assume that the probability $P(\text{success up to } R=k)$ approaches 1 as $k$ increases, based on the cumulative success of verifying each $p_i$ in their respective $x_i^R$ with probability $p$ in each round.

• For Round $R=k+1$:

  • The probability of success for round $k+1$, independent of previous rounds, remains $p$.

  • The cumulative probability of success from $R=1$ to $R=k+1$ can be represented as:

$$P(\text{success up to } R=k+1) = P(\text{success up to } R=k) \times P(\text{success in } R=k+1)$$

Given $P(\text{success in } R=k+1) = p$, and assuming $P(\text{success up to } R=k)$ approaches 1, the product also approaches 1, implying high efficacy of $Λ$ in authenticating $P$.

Accumulation of Verification Results ($Λ$)

• The formal representation of $Λ$ as the logical AND ($\bigwedge$) of all verification outcomes across $n$ rounds is modeled by the equation:

$$Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

• The probability that $Λ$ accurately reflects the authentication of $P$ is then modeled as:

$$P(Λ = \text{true}) = \lim_{n \to \infty} \prod_{R=1}^{n} p$$

Conclusion

The formulaic sequence and equations provided model the probability that the accumulation of verification results ($Λ$) effectively authenticates the sequence $P$ in $Π$. Under the assumption of a secure verification process and a fair shuffling mechanism, the model demonstrates that as the number of rounds $n$ increases, the likelihood of $Λ$ representing true authentication of $P$ approaches certainty. This probabilistic proof underscores the robustness of $Π$ in ensuring the sequence $P$'s integrity across a dynamic verification framework.

.

#3: Accumulation of Results Proof of ($Λ$)

---

The accumulator $Λ$ in the cryptographic protocol $Π$ plays a pivotal role in the authentication process of a sequence $P$ against a dynamically shuffled alphabet $X^R$ through all rounds $R$. This process is contingent upon the successful verification of each element $p_i$ within the designated subset $x_i^R$. With $A$ as the foundational alphabet, the protocol intricately shuffles $A$ into $X^R$ for each round using the shuffling function $Σ$, thereby ensuring a unique configuration for each verification instance. This unique setup, alongside the indicating function $Ω$ that specifies the subset for verification, and the verification condition $Μ$ affirming the presence of $p_i$ in $x_i^R$, establishes a robust framework for sequence authentication.

To establish the theorem that $Λ$ accurately reflects $P$'s authentication, two directions of logic are explored. The forward direction asserts that if $Λ$ is true, then all verification conditions $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ across rounds $R$ must be positive, signifying successful authentication of each $p_i$ within its respective subset $x_i^R$. Conversely, the backward direction posits that the verification of each $p_i$ within the correct subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds necessarily leads to the truth of $Λ$, thereby substantiating $Κ$ ($Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$) as the ultimate proof of knowledge. This logical framework underscores the necessity and sufficiency of $Λ$ for the comprehensive verification of $P$, attesting to the protocol $Π$'s efficacy in ensuring the integrity and authenticity of the sequence authentication process.

Theorem

In $Π$, the accumulator $Λ$ unequivocally reflects the sequence $P$'s authentication against the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ across all rounds $R$, contingent on the verification of every element $p_i$ within the appropriate subset $x_i^R$.

Given:

Within the cryptographic protocol $Π$, a series of fundamental elements form the basis for sequence authentication:

• $A$, representing the alphabet, serves as the foundational source from which both the sequence $P$ and the shuffled alphabets $X^R$ are derived. Each element of $P$, denoted as $p_i$, is drawn from this static set of symbols.

• $P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$ constitutes the sequence subject to verification within the protocol. It comprises indexed elements $p_i$ selected from the alphabet $A$, ready for authentication.

• $Σ(A) \rightarrow X^R$ embodies the shuffling function employed in each round $R$ of the protocol. This function operates on the alphabet $A$ to generate a distinct shuffled alphabet $X^R$ for every iteration, enhancing the security and randomness of the authentication process.

• $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$ plays a pivotal role in pinpointing the specific subset $x_i^R$ within the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ for the verification of each element $p_i$ during round $R$. This function ensures that each element is directed to its designated subset for accurate verification.

• $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ serves as the verification condition crucial for affirming the presence of $p_i$ within its designated subset $x_i^R$ during the authentication process. This condition yields true if $p_i$ is successfully verified within the specified subset, thereby contributing to the robustness and integrity of the authentication mechanism within the protocol $Π$.

$$P, X^R \sim A$$

$$P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$$

$$Σ(A) = X^R$$

$$Ω(p_i) = x_i^R$$

$$Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$$

To Prove:

The equation $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ holds true if and only if all $p_i$ align with their corresponding $x_i^R$. In the forward direction ($⇒$), the truth of $Λ$ indicates that all verification conditions $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ across all rounds $R$ are met, confirming the successful validation of each $p_i$ within $x_i^R$. Conversely, in the backward direction ($⇐$), if every $p_i$ is verified within its correct $x_i^R$ for all rounds $R$, then all $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ must be true, thereby necessitating the truth of $Λ$. This mutual implication validates $Κ$ as being equivalent to $Λ$, ensuring the authenticity of the sequence authentication process within the protocol.

$$Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

is true if and only if all $p_i$ align with their corresponding $x_i^R$.

• (⇒ Direction): Assuming $Λ$ is true signifies all verification conditions $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ across $R$ are affirmative, denoting each $p_i$'s successful validation within $x_i^R$.

• (⇐ Direction): Conversely, if each $p_i$ is verified within the correct $x_i^R$ for all $R$, then all $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ are true, mandating $Λ$'s truth, thereby validating $Κ$ as $Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$.

Conclusion: Thus, $Λ$'s truthfulness is both a necessary and sufficient condition for $P$'s comprehensive verification against $X^R$, attesting to $Π$'s effectiveness. .

#4: Proof by Contradiction

---

Theorem

In the protocol $Π$, the accumulator of verification results ($Λ$) is true if and only if every element $p_i$ of the sequence $P$ is verified to be within the correct subset $x_i^R$ of $X^R$ for each round $R$.

Assumption for Contradiction:

Suppose our theorem statement is false. That is, there exist two possibilities under this assumption:

1. $Λ$ is true even though there is at least one $p_i$ that is not verified to be within its correct subset $x_i^R$ for some round $R$.

2. $Λ$ is false even though every $p_i$ is verified to be within its correct subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds $R$.

Exploration of Possibility 1:

• Given $Λ$ is true, by definition, this means $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ must hold true for all $p_i$ and $R$.

• If there is at least one $p_i$ not in its correct subset $x_i^R$ yet $Λ$ is true, this would imply $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ for a situation where $p_i \notin x_i^R$, contradicting the definition of $Μ$.

• This contradiction demonstrates that the first possibility cannot occur if $Λ$ accurately reflects the verification process, as per the protocol’s logic.

Exploration of Possibility 2:

• Assuming every $p_i$ is verified within its correct subset $x_i^R$ for all rounds $R$, by definition of $Μ$, this should result in

• for all instances.

• If $Λ$ were false under these conditions, it would imply that the aggregation of all true $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ results in $Λ$ being false, which is logically impossible given

$$Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

is a conjunction of all verification conditions.

• This logical impossibility confirms that the second possibility is not feasible, reinforcing the accuracy and integrity of $Λ$ in aggregating verification outcomes.

Conclusion:

Given the contradictions found in both possible scenarios under the assumption that our theorem statement is false, we conclude that the original statement must be true. Therefore, $Λ$ is true if and only if every $p_i$ in $P$ is verified to be within its correct subset $x_i^R$ across all rounds $R$, thereby substantiating the comprehensive verification of $P$ within the dynamically secure framework of $Π$. This proof by contradiction not only affirms the logical structure of $Π$ but also underscores its reliability and validity in sequence authentication.

#5: Extended Proofs ( Accumulation Efficacy)

---

In the mathematical framework of the multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony ($Π$), which operates on a sequence $P$ derived from a static alphabet $A$, we define the processes and validations crucial to the protocol's operation. Initially, during the initialization and shuffling phase, given $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$ and $A$ as inputs, the shuffling function $Σ$ transforms $A$ into uniquely shuffled sets $X^R$ for each verification round $R$. This process enhances security by introducing unpredictability. Subsequently, the witness function $Ω$ assigns each $p_i$ to a specific subset $x_i^R$ within $X^R$ for verification. The verification condition $Μ$ then ensures that $p_i$ is indeed present within $x_i^R$, denoted by $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$ if $p_i$ belongs to $x_i^R$. This step authenticates each element against its designated subset, ensuring the integrity of the verification process.

Moving on to the accumulation of verification results, the outcomes of $Μ$ across all rounds are aggregated into $Λ$, represented as $\Lambda = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$. This accumulation encapsulates the collective verification success. Finally, the validity of the proof, denoted by $Κ$, is established based on the collective truth of $Λ$, expressed as $Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$. In essence, $Λ$ serves as a measure of cumulative verification success, and $Κ$'s validity hinges upon unanimous positive verifications, thereby affirming the authenticity of $P$ within the dynamic context of $Π$.

In the context of the multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony ($Π$), operating over a sequence $P$ derived from a static alphabet $A$, we formalize the operations, verification, and the final synthesis of proof through a detailed mathematical exposition, ensuring clarity and alignment with foundational principles.

Protocol Operation and Verification Rounds

1. Initialization and Shuffling:

   • Given: $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$ and $A$ as inputs.

   • Operation: For each verification round $R$, apply $Σ$ to $A$ to yield $X^R$.

$$X^R = Σ(A), \quad \forall R \in \{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$$

Meaning: $Σ$ denotes the shuffling function, transforming $A$ into a uniquely shuffled set $X^R$ for each round, enhancing unpredictability and security.

2. Witness Function and Verification: - Process: $Ω$ determines a target subset $x_i^R \subseteq X^R$ for each $p_i$.

$$Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R, \quad \forall i \in \{1, 2, \ldots, n\}$$

Verification: Assess $p_i$'s presence within $x_i^R$, denoted by $Μ$.

$$Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} \iff p_i \in x_i^R$$

Implication: This step authenticates each $p_i$ against its assigned subset, validating authenticity per round.

Accumulation of Verification Results

3. Results Accumulation and Proof Validation:

   • Accumulation: Compile outcomes of $Μ$ across all rounds into $Λ$.

$$\Lambda = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$$

Final Proof: Validate $Κ$ based on the collective truth of $Λ$.

$$Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$$

Interpretation: $Λ$ embodies the cumulative verification success, with $Κ$'s validity contingent upon unanimous positive verifications, affirming $P$'s authentication within the dynamic context of $Π$.

Theorem: The effective aggregation of verification results ($Λ$) precisely reflects the comprehensive authentication of sequence $P$ across all rounds ($R$), encapsulated by $Π$.

Forward Assertion: If $Λ$ is true, implying the aggregate of $Μ$ over $R$ is uniformly positive, then each $p_i$ is verified within the correct $x_i^R$, thus:

$$Λ = \text{true} \implies \forall p_i \in P, \, Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}, \, \forall R$$

Backward Assertion: Conversely, if each $p_i$ is successfully authenticated within its designated subset $x_i^R$ for all $R$, then $Λ$ must be true, encapsulating the protocol’s integrity:

$$\bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}, \forall i \implies Λ = \text{true}$$

Conclusion: This delineation affirms that $Λ$, as an accumulation of $Μ$ across rounds, serves as a robust metric for the authentication of $P$, with $Κ$ as the conclusive proof of knowledge, underscoring $Π$'s efficacy in sequence verification within a dynamically secure framework.

To ensure alignment with our established lemmas, axioms, constraints, and systemic framework, we refine the proof of accumulation efficacy to mirror the intricacies and specifications of our system $Π$. This revised proof elucidates the critical role of $Λ$ in confirming the authentication of the sequence $P$ throughout all verification rounds $R$, in accordance with the operational principles and verification logic of $Π$.

Extended Proof of Accumulation Efficacy

Theorem: The accumulator $Λ$, through the effective aggregation of verification results, accurately represents the thorough authentication of the sequence $P$ across every round $R$ within the protocol $Π$.

Refined Assertions

Forward Assertion: Assuming $Λ$ holds true, indicating a universal affirmation of the verification condition $Μ$ across all rounds $R$, it logically follows that every element $p_i$ of $P$ has been validated within its respective subset $x_i^R$. This assertion can be formally captured as:

$$Λ = \text{true} \implies \forall p_i \in P, \, \forall R, \, Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$$

This implies that the integrity of $Λ$ as true necessitates the successful verification of every $p_i$ within its designated $x_i^R$ across all rounds, ensuring the completeness and correctness of the sequence $P$ authentication.

Backward Assertion: If, for each round $R$, every $p_i$ is affirmatively verified within its intended subset $x_i^R$, thereby fulfilling the verification condition $Μ$, then the cumulative verification result $Λ$ must inherently be true. This logical proposition can be succinctly expressed as:

$$\forall i, \, \forall R, \, Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true} \implies Λ = \text{true}$$

The sufficiency condition mandates that the aggregate verification success of all $p_i$ in their corresponding $x_i^R$ for every $R$ compels the truth of $Λ$, encapsulating the protocol’s verification integrity and the sequential authentication's authenticity.

Conclusion

By analytically delineating both the forward and backward assertions, we solidify the theorem's validity, demonstrating that the truth value of $Λ$—as the logical conjunction of all individual verification outcomes $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$—is both necessary and sufficient for affirming the comprehensive authentication of $P$ within the dynamic verification framework of $Π$. This refined proof underscores $Π$'s robust verification mechanism, ensuring $P$'s integrity and validating $Κ$ as the definitive proof of knowledge. Through this elaboration, $Π$’s efficacy in securely authenticating sequences within a dynamically secure and algorithmically precise environment is irrefutably established, adhering to the rigorous standards set forth by our system's lemmas, axioms, and constraints.

---

Axioms and Lemmas

Axioms

Axiom of Initialization: The protocol $Π$ commences with a predefined sequence $P$, comprised of elements $p_1$ to $p_n$, and a static alphabet $A$. For each verification round $R$, the shuffling function $Σ$ generates a fresh and unpredictable shuffled version of $A$, denoted as $X^R$. This axiom ensures that the protocol begins with a consistent sequence and introduces variability through shuffled alphabets in each round.

• Equation: $P = \{p_1, p_2, ..., p_n\}$, $X^R = Σ(A)$ for $R = 1, 2, ..., n$.

• Expression: This axiom establishes the protocol $Π$ begins with a predefined sequence $P$, consisting of elements $p_1$ to $p_n$, and a static alphabet $A$. For each verification round $R$, a shuffled version of $A$, denoted as $X^R$, is produced through the shuffling function $Σ$, ensuring fresh and unpredictable challenges in each round.

Axiom of Random Distribution: Each round $R$ of the protocol $Π$ produces a distinct shuffled alphabet $X^R$ from the static alphabet $A$ via the shuffling function $Σ$. The axiom asserts that for differing rounds $R$ and $R'$, the shuffled alphabets $X^R$ and $X^{R'}$ are distinct ($X^R \neq X^{R'}$). This condition ensures the unpredictability and non-repetitive nature of the challenges encountered in successive rounds, vital for enhancing the security of the verification process.

• Equation: $X^R = Σ(A)$, ensuring $X^R \neq X^{R'}$ for $R \neq R'$.

• Expression: This asserts that each round $R$ of the protocol generates a uniquely shuffled alphabet $X^R$ from $A$, via $Σ$. The condition $X^R \neq X^{R'}$ for differing rounds ensures that the sequence of challenges is non-repetitive and unpredictable, fundamental for securing the verification process.

Axiom of Sequence Verification: For every element $p_i$ within the sequence $P$, there exists a designated subset $x_i^R$ within the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ where $p_i$ can be located and verified. This axiom emphasizes the protocol's capability to identify and authenticate individual elements of the sequence, ensuring the integrity of the verification process.

• Equation: Existence of $x_i^R$ such that $p_i \in x_i^R$ for each $p_i$ in $P$.

• Expression: For every element $p_i$ within the sequence $P$, there exists a targeted subset $x_i^R$ within the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ where $p_i$ can be found and verified. This axiom underscores the protocol's capacity to pinpoint and verify individual sequence elements.

Axiom of Completeness: The axiom asserts that for all elements $p_i$ within the sequence $P$, there exists at least one subset $x_i^R$ within the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ where the verification condition $Μ$ returns true ($Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$). This ensures comprehensive verification of every element of $P$ throughout the execution of the protocol, reinforcing its reliability and completeness.

• Equation: $\forall p_i \in P, \exists x_i^R \in X^R : Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$.

• Expression: Signifies that for all elements $p_i$ within $P$, there must be a subset $x_i^R$ in $X^R$ for which the verification condition $Μ$ returns true, ensuring every element of $P$ is verified throughout the protocol's execution.

Axiom of Non-collision: This axiom guarantees the uniqueness of the generated shuffled alphabets $X^R$ and their corresponding subsets $x_i^R$ across different rounds. It ensures that no collisions occur in the generation process, maintaining the integrity of the verification process by preventing identical shuffles or subsets from appearing in multiple rounds.

• Equation: Unique generation of $X^R$ and $x_i^R$, preventing collisions.

• Expression: Guarantees that the generation process for $X^R$ and its subsets $x_i^R$ produces unique configurations, ensuring the integrity of the verification process by avoiding identical shuffles or subsets across different rounds.

Lemmas

Lemma of Witness Validity: This lemma asserts that if the witness function $Ω$ correctly identifies the subset $x_i^R$ for an element $p_i$ and the subsequent verification $Μ$ confirms the presence of $p_i$ within $x_i^R$, then the verification of $p_i$ for that specific round is considered valid. Mathematically, it can be expressed as $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R \land Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$, indicating the conjunction of $Ω$ and $Μ$ as criteria for valid verification.

• Equation: $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R \land Μ(p_i, x_i^R) = \text{true}$.

• Expression: States that if the witness function $Ω$ accurately identifies the subset $x_i^R$ for an element $p_i$, and the verification $Μ$ confirms $p_i$'s presence in $x_i^R$, then $p_i$'s verification for that round is deemed valid.

Lemma of Comprehensive Verification: This lemma signifies that the sequence $P$ achieves full authentication against the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ if, for each round $R$, the verification condition $Μ$ holds true for every $p_i$ within its designated subset $x_i^R$. Mathematically, it is represented as $\bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow P \text{ authenticated}$, emphasizing the comprehensive nature of the verification process across all rounds.

• Equation: $\bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow P \text{ authenticated}$.

• Expression: Indicates that the sequence $P$ is fully authenticated against the shuffled alphabet $X^R$ if, for all rounds $R$, the verification condition $Μ$ for each $p_i$ within its respective subset $x_i^R$ holds true.

Lemma of Accumulative Proof: In this lemma, the final proof of knowledge $Κ$ is validated if the accumulator $Λ$, which aggregates all verification outcomes $Μ$ across rounds $R$, evaluates to true. This lemma encapsulates the protocol's integrity by affirming the authentication of the sequence $P$ through cumulative verification success. Mathematically, it is denoted as $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow Κ = \text{true}$.

• Equation: $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow Κ = \text{true}$.

• Expression: Explains that the final proof of knowledge $Κ$ is validated if the accumulator $Λ$, which aggregates all verification outcomes $Μ$ across rounds $R$, is true. This encapsulates the protocol's integrity by affirming the sequence $P$'s authentication through cumulative verification success.

Lemma of Dynamic Adaptability: Asserting the protocol's ability to adapt to varying sizes of the sequence $P$ and alphabet $A$ without compromising integrity, this lemma highlights the scalability and adaptability of $Π$. Mathematically, it states the adaptation without loss of $Π$ integrity, expressed as $|P|$ and $|A|$ varying without affecting the protocol's integrity.

• Equation: Adaptation to varying $|P|$ and $|A|$ without loss of $Π$ integrity.

• Expression: Asserts that the protocol $Π$ can flexibly adjust to different sizes of the sequence $P$ and alphabet $A$ without compromising its verification integrity or security, demonstrating $Π$'s scalability and adaptability.

Lemma of Security Enhancement: This lemma emphasizes the protocol's enhanced security against cryptographic and brute-force threats due to the unpredictability introduced by the shuffling function $Σ$, creating a dynamic and secure verification environment. Mathematically, it states the security enhancement as $Σ(A) \rightarrow X^R$, underlining the crucial role of $Σ$ in bolstering security measures within the protocol.

• Equation: Enhanced security through unpredictability, $Σ(A) \rightarrow X^R$.

• Expression: Highlights that security against cryptographic and brute-force threats is significantly enhanced by the unpredictability factor introduced through the shuffling function $Σ$, creating a dynamic and secure verification environment.

Constraints

Constraint of Round Completeness:

• Equation: $\forall R, Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \text{ must complete}$.

• Expression: This constraint mandates that in every round $R$, the verification process $Μ$ for each element $p_i$ within its designated subset $x_i^R$ must be fully executed, ensuring no part of the verification cycle is left incomplete.

Constraint of Subset Uniqueness:

• Equation: $x_i^R \neq x_j^{R'}$ for $R \neq R'$ or $i \neq j$.

• Expression: To maintain the integrity of the verification process, each subset $x_i^R$ generated for a round $R$ must be unique. This prevents any potential overlap or repetition of subsets across different rounds, reinforcing the security and robustness of $Π$.

Constraint of Proof Consistency:

• Equation: $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \Rightarrow Κ = \text{true}$.

• Expression: The validation of the proof of knowledge $Κ$ hinges on the consistent truth of all verification outcomes $Μ$ aggregated in $Λ$. This ensures that $Κ$ is declared true only if every element $p_i$ of $P$ is successfully verified across all rounds $R$.

Constraint of Witness Integrity:

• Equation: $Ω(p_i) \text{ must be verifiable against } P$.

• Expression: The witness $Ω$, indicating where an element $p_i$ should be found within $X^R$, must be reliably linked to the prover's knowledge of the sequence $P$. This guards against misleading or incorrect indications that could compromise the verification integrity.

Constraint of Verification Transparency:

• Equation: $Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \land Κ \text{ must be externally verifiable}$.

• Expression: The process underscores the necessity for both the verification outcomes $Μ$ and the final proof $Κ$ to be transparent and amenable to external verification. This openness fosters trust and verifiability in the authentication process implemented by $Π$.

Principles

• Principle of Sequential Integrity:

  • Equation: Orderly $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$ preserves $P$ integrity.

  • Expression: The orderly execution of verification $Μ$ for elements within $P$, following the sequence integrity, ensures the robustness of the authentication process, guaranteeing that each step follows logically from the previous one without breaches in logical continuity.

• Principle of Protocol Security:

  • Equation: $Σ(A) \land \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R) \land Λ \Rightarrow \text{secure } Π$.

  • Expression: The security of the protocol $Π$ is reinforced through the combination of unpredictable shuffling ($Σ$), thorough verification ($Μ$) across all rounds, and the cumulative confirmation ($Λ$) of these verifications, creating a robust defense against unauthorized access and manipulation.

• Principle of Verifiability:

  • Equation: External verification of $Μ \land Κ$.

  • Expression: Emphasizes the protocol's capacity for its verification steps and the final proof to be validated by third parties, enhancing the overall credibility and trustworthiness of $Π$.

• Principle of Non-repudiation:

  • Equation: $Λ$ documents verification, preventing denial.

  • Expression: The documentation and aggregation of verification results in $Λ$ serve as a solid foundation for non-repudiation, ensuring that once an authentication claim is made, it cannot be denied or disputed.

Implications

• Implication of Continuity:

  • Equation: $Π$ mechanism for re-verification or secure termination after failure.

  • Expression: This ensures that $Π$ includes mechanisms to either allow for the re-verification of elements upon failure or to securely terminate the session, safeguarding the integrity of the process and preventing potential security breaches.

• Implication of Evolution:

  • Equation: $Π$ updates to cryptographic methods without negating past validations.

  • Expression: $Π$ is designed to be future-proof, permitting updates and enhancements to its cryptographic methodologies without invalidating previously authenticated sequences. This adaptability ensures that $Π$ remains relevant and secure in the face of evolving cryptographic landscapes.

---

Rosario-Wang Protocol

Initialization of the Protocol (Π)

1. Protocol Initialization:

   • Let $Π$ denote the entire proof of knowledge protocol.

   • $A$ represents the static alphabet from which sequences are generated.

   • $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$ is the sequence to be authenticated, with $p_i$ being the $i$-th element of $P$.

Preparation of the Alphabet and Shuffled Alphabet

2. Alphabet Preparation and Shuffling:

   • $X^R$ represents the shuffled alphabet derived from $A$ for round $R$, where $R = 1, 2, \ldots, n$.

   • The shuffling process per round is defined by $Σ(A) \rightarrow X^R$, ensuring each $X^R$ is a unique permutation of $A$.

Generation of the Sequence and its Verification

3. Sequence Generation and Subset Selection:

   • For each round $R$, a subset $x_i^R \subseteq X^R$ is targeted for verification. Here, $i$ corresponds to the targeted index within $P$ for that round.

   • The selection of $x_i^R$ for a given $p_i \in P$ is guided by a witness $Ω$, which indicates the appropriate subset $x_i^R$ where $p_i$ should be found.

Verification Process

4. Verification and Witness:

   • The verification condition for round $R$ is denoted as $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$, checking if $p_i$ is present within $x_i^R$.

   • The witness $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$ links $p_i$ to its corresponding subset $x_i^R$ for verification.

Result Accumulation and Proof of Knowledge

5. Result Accumulation and Conclusion:

   • The accumulation of verification results across all rounds $R$ is captured by $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$, where $Λ$ is true iff all instances of $Μ$ are true.

   • The final proof of knowledge, $Κ$, is validated iff $Λ$ is true, denoted mathematically as $Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$.

Notational Summary

• $Π$: The multi-round proof of knowledge ceremony.

• $A$: The static alphabet.

• $P$: The sequence to be authenticated.

• $X^R$: The shuffled alphabet for round $R$.

• $x_i^R$: The subset of $X^R$ targeted in round $R$.

• $Σ$: The random distribution function that generates $X^R$ from $A$.

• $Ω$: The witness function that indicates the subset $x_i^R$ for verification of $p_i$.

• $Μ$: The verification condition for a member $p_i$ in subset $x_i^R$.

• $Λ$: The accumulator of verification results across rounds.

• $Κ$: The final proof of knowledge, affirming the authenticity of $P$.

---

1. Protocol and Sequence Declaration:

   • $Π$: Proof of knowledge protocol.

   • $P = \{p_1, p_2, \ldots, p_n\}$: Sequence to be authenticated.

2. Alphabet and Shuffling:

   • $A$: Static alphabet.

   • $X^R = Σ(A)$: Shuffled alphabet $X$ for round $R$, obtained by applying the shuffling function $Σ$ to $A$.

3. Subset Selection and Verification:

   • $x_i^R$: Subset of $X^R$ targeted in round $R$ for verifying element $p_i$.

   • $Ω(p_i) \rightarrow x_i^R$: Witness function indicating the subset $x_i^R$ where $p_i$ is expected to be found for verification.

4. Verification Condition:

   • $Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$: Verification condition for round $R$, checking if $p_i$ is present within $x_i^R$.

5. Result Accumulation and Proof of Knowledge:

   • $Λ = \bigwedge_{R=1}^{n} Μ(p_i, x_i^R)$: Accumulator of verification results across all rounds $R$, where $Λ$ is true if and only if all instances of $Μ$ are true.

   • $Κ \Leftrightarrow Λ$: The final proof of knowledge $Κ$ is validated if and only if $Λ$ is true.