
Crypto investor, Entrepreneur. 🩸🩸🩸 $CULT, @wearecultdao. @modulusZk https://teapawt.net/t.co/2AZY5SP9oD My posts are NFA. DYOR stay SAFU.
Joined February 2013
- Tweets7K
- Following894
- Followers286
- Likes35K
Dao.cult retweeted
The EVM can run a lot of things. But do all things need to run through the EVM?
Worth asking.
ZK Basics | Ep. 8: Why ZK proofs cost so much
Verifying a proof takes milliseconds. Creating one is the expensive part. Here's where the money goes:
1. The computation gets rewritten. Your program has to be turned into a form math can prove — a circuit. Nothing about this step is free.
2. Proving is heavy. Building the proof can take thousands of times more compute than just running the program normally.
3. Specialized hardware. Serious proving runs on GPUs and custom chips, which is why there's a whole industry around proving infrastructure.
4. It's dropping fast. Costs have fallen by orders of magnitude in a few years, which is exactly why ZK moved from papers to production.
The tradeoff: pay once to prove, let everyone verify cheaply forever.
Save this one💜
Dao.cult retweeted
Did you know?
The most revolutionary tech to have ever graced the crypto industry by @ModulusZK is and will be powered by ethereum:0xf0f9d895aca5c8678f706fb8216fa22957685a13?
Read the manifesto 🩸🩸🩸
cultdao.io/manifesto.pdf
Dao.cult retweeted
We think the EVM is doing too much work in ZK.
Modulus is exploring another route: express computation as logic and prove that directly.
zkFOL is already public: github.com/zkFOL/zkfol
Working toward proofs that cost less and reveal less.
Dao.cult retweeted
a great video to show family and friends explaining what @ModulusZK and zkFOL can do for them
Dao.cult retweeted
There is nothing like the @wearecultdao community 🩸🩸🩸
Dao.cult retweeted
There is nothing like the @wearecultdao community 🩸🩸🩸
Dao.cult retweeted
Overwhelming response, thank you everybody 🙏
Dao.cult retweeted
Replying to @Zac_Aztec
Thanks, have a look closer at the arithmetisation / front end logic of the system. That's where the magic happens.
The back end we bind to is where a lot of your commentary lives, and this is Zinc+ which Nethermind are aware they have some way to go still in optimisations.
Dao.cult retweeted
"Men wanted for hazardous journey. Low wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness. Safe return doubtful.
Honour and recognition in event of success."
- Ernest Shackleton
Dao.cult retweeted
It's become clear there are willing volunteers in the community happy to relieve some of the task load the team is having to cope with day to day.
If this describes you, then please send me a DM letting me know how many hours a week you can volunteer. No experience necessary.
Dao.cult retweeted
Replying to @NTmoney
Then you better put @wearecultdao $CULT next to $BTC & $ETH. As we match every single one & more of this
“Cryptocurrencies are credibly neutral. Transparent and accessible from day 1. No coordinated marketing from any jurisdiction. Low insider ownership. No downtime.”
Dao.cult retweeted
Would love for @Zac_Aztec to have a look at zkFOL’s results
We’re pleased to report that @moduluszk's zkFOL tech stack is now public for review at github.com/zkFOL/zkfol/.
The paper draft is also online at github.com/zkFOL/zkfol/blob/…
Our docs and website have been updated inline.
Dao.cult retweeted
Replying to @IOHK_Charles
@IOHK_Charles In May 2025 you reviewed Gabbay's paper, built a Lean EDSL on it, and said the computational complexity wasn't practical. Fair challenge, and @ModulusZK took it seriously.
They kept building with no funding, no help, no attention, only got ignored and still gets ignored and zkFOL now proves in milliseconds on a normal CPU, benchmarked against RISC Zero and SP1. Would genuinely love your take on whether this answers your concern: github.com/zkFOL/zkfo
I reviewed the paper and wrote an EDSL in Lean based on it. My implementation demonstrates how first-order logic compiles directly to polynomial constraints, providing the missing link between high-level cryptocurrency invariants and low-level zkSNARK circuits. By mapping logical formulas to R1CS, developers can specify complex financial systems declaratively while achieving cryptographic verifiability.
The core insight: monetary invariants are logical statements. "Total supply remains constant" becomes ∀tx. sum(inputs) = sum(outputs). "No double spending" becomes ∀coin. spent(coin) ⇒ ¬spendable(coin). These specifications compile automatically to polynomial constraints, eliminating manual circuit construction—the primary barrier to zkEVM adoption.
The polynomial semantics handles the full complexity of financial logic. Negation through sign gadgets enables expressing invalidity conditions—quantifiers over finite domains model transaction batches. The sparse polynomial representation keeps verification costs manageable even for complex state transitions. Most critically, conjunction's additive compilation means combining multiple invariants doesn't compound proof complexity, essential for composable financial protocols.
The R1CS output integrates directly with existing zkSNARK toolchains (Groth16, PLONK, Halo2). A balance check requiring hundreds of hand-written constraints reduces to a single logical formula. The compiler handles witness generation, wire allocation, and constraint optimization automatically.
Here's the code:
-- ArithFOL.lean — Lean 4 EDSL for Gabbay-style arithmetised first-order logic
-- Author: Charles Hoskinson License: MIT
--
-- * Full polynomial semantics (truth ≙ 0) + complete R1CS compiler.
-- * Extra Poly utilities (pow / evaluate / degree / leadingCoeff / isZero / isConst).
-- * Pretty R1CS printer and runnable examples at bottom.
-- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
import Std.Data.RBMap.Lemmas
open Std (RBMap)
/-! ### Signature --------------------------------------------------------- -/
structure FuncSymbol where name : String := "" ; arity : Nat := 0
structure PredSymbol where name : String := "" ; arity : Nat := 0
/-! ### Syntax: de-Bruijn terms & formulas -------------------------------- -/
inductive Term : Nat → Type
| var {n} : Fin n → Term n
| const {n} : Rat → Term n
| indet {n} : Term n -- distinguished X
| add {n} : Term n → Term n → Term n
| mul {n} : Term n → Term n → Term n
| neg {n} : Term n → Term n
| func {n} : (f : FuncSymbol) → (Fin f.arity → Term n) → Term n
inductive Formula : Nat → Type
| top {n} : Formula n
| bot {n} : Formula n
| eq {n} (t u : Term n) : Formula n
| pred {n} (P : PredSymbol) (args : Fin P.arity → Term n) : Formula n
| and {n} (φ ψ : Formula n) : Formula n
| or {n} (φ ψ : Formula n) : Formula n
| forall {n} (φ : Formula (n+1)) : Formula n
| exists {n} (φ : Formula (n+1)) : Formula n
| notG {n} (φ : Formula n) : Formula n -- sign-gadget ¬φ
/-! ### Polynomial datatype ----------------------------------------------- -/
structure Poly where coeffs : RBMap Nat Rat compare
deriving Repr, DecidableEq
namespace Poly
def zero : Poly := ⟨RBMap.empty⟩
def const (q : Rat) : Poly := if q = 0 then zero else ⟨RBMap.ofList [(0,q)]⟩
def X : Poly := ⟨RBMap.ofList [(1,1)]⟩
@[inline] def clean (m : RBMap Nat Rat compare) :=
m.fold (init:=RBMap.empty) (fun acc k v => if v=0 then acc else acc.insert k v)
@[inline] def add (p q : Poly) : Poly :=
⟨clean <| p.coeffs.fold (init:=q.coeffs)
(fun m k v => m.insert k (v + m.findD k 0))⟩
@[inline] def neg (p : Poly) : Poly :=
⟨p.coeffs.fold (init:=RBMap.empty) (fun m k v => m.insert k (-v))⟩
@[inline] def mul (p q : Poly) : Poly :=
⟨clean <|
p.coeffs.fold (init:=RBMap.empty) (fun acc kp vp =>
q.coeffs.fold (init:=acc) (fun acc2 kq vq =>
let k := kp+kq
let c := acc2.findD k 0 + vp*vq
if c = 0 then acc2.erase k else acc2.insert k c))⟩
@[inline] def square (p : Poly) : Poly := p.mul p
@[inline] def pow (p : Poly) : Nat → Poly
| 0 => const 1
| 1 => p
| n+1 =>
let q := pow p (n/2)
let q2 := q.mul q
if n % 2 = 0 then q2 else q2.mul p
@[inline] def ratPow : Rat → Nat → Rat
| _, 0 => 1
| r, 1 => r
| r, n+1 =>
let half := ratPow r (n/2)
let sq := half*half
if n%2=0 then sq else sq*r
@[inline] def evaluate (p : Poly) (x : Rat) : Rat :=
if x = 0 then p.coeffs.findD 0 0 else
if x = 1 then p.coeffs.fold (init:=0) (fun acc _ v => acc+v) else
p.coeffs.fold (init:=0) (fun acc k v => acc + v * ratPow x k)
@[inline] def degree (p : Poly) : Option Nat :=
p.coeffs.fold (init:=none) (fun o k _ =>
match o with | none => some k | some d => some (max d k))
@[inline] def leadingCoeff (p : Poly) : Option Rat :=
match p.degree with | none => none | some d => p.coeffs.find? d
@[inline] def isZero (p : Poly) : Bool := p.coeffs.isEmpty
@[inline] def isConst (p : Poly) : Option Rat :=
if p.isZero then some 0
else if p.coeffs.size = 1 ∧ p.coeffs.min?.map (·.1) = some 0 then
some (p.coeffs.findD 0 0) else none
@[inline] def compose (p q : Poly) : Poly :=
p.coeffs.fold (init:=Poly.zero) (fun acc k c =>
acc.add (Poly.const c).mul (q.pow k))
end Poly
/-! ### Environment -------------------------------------------------------- -/
structure Env (n : Nat) where
varVal : Fin n → Rat
domain : List Rat
namespace Env
def extend {n} (e : Env n) (a : Rat) : Env (n+1) :=
{ varVal := fun
| ⟨0,_⟩ => a
| ⟨i+1,h⟩ => e.varVal ⟨i, Nat.lt_of_succ_lt_succ h⟩,
domain := e.domain }
end Env
/-! ### Interpretation ----------------------------------------------------- -/
mutual
def interpTerm {n} (ρ : Env n) : Term n → Poly
| .var i => Poly.const (ρ.varVal i)
| .const q => Poly.const q
| .indet => Poly.X
| .add s t => (interpTerm ρ s).add (interpTerm ρ t)
| .mul s t => (interpTerm ρ s).mul (interpTerm ρ t)
| .neg t => Poly.neg (interpTerm ρ t)
| .func _ _ => Poly.zero
def liftTerm {k} : Term k → Term (k+1)
| .var i => .var ⟨i.val+1, Nat.succ_lt_succ i.isLt⟩
| .const q => .const q
| .indet => .indet
| .add s t => .add (liftTerm s) (liftTerm t)
| .mul s t => .mul (liftTerm s) (liftTerm t)
| .neg t => .neg (liftTerm t)
| .func f as => .func f (fun i => liftTerm (as i))
def liftFormula {k} : Formula k → Formula (k+1)
| .top => .top
| .bot => .bot
| .eq t u => .eq (liftTerm t) (liftTerm u)
| .pred P as => .pred P (fun i => liftTerm (as i))
| .and φ ψ => .and (liftFormula φ) (liftFormula ψ)
| .or φ ψ => .or (liftFormula φ) (liftFormula ψ)
| .forall φ => .forall (liftFormula φ)
| .exists φ => .exists (liftFormula φ)
| .notG φ => .notG (liftFormula φ)
def interpFormula {n} (ρ : Env n) : Formula n → Poly
| .top => Poly.zero
| .bot => Poly.const 1
| .eq t u => (interpTerm ρ t).add (Poly.neg (interpTerm ρ u)) |> Poly.square
| .pred _ _ => Poly.const 1
| .and φ ψ =>
let p := interpFormula ρ φ
let q := interpFormula ρ ψ
p.square.add q.square
| .or φ ψ => (interpFormula ρ φ).mul (interpFormula ρ ψ)
| .forall φ =>
ρ.domain.foldl (init:=Poly.zero) fun acc a =>
acc.add ((interpFormula (ρ.extend a) φ).square)
| .exists φ =>
match ρ.domain with
| [] => Poly.const 1
| a :: _ => interpFormula (ρ.extend a) φ -- naive witness
| .notG φ =>
let φ' := liftFormula φ
let b : Term (n+1) := .var ⟨0, Nat.zero_lt_succ n⟩
let boolB := Formula.eq (.mul b (.add b (.const (-1)))) (.const 0)
let conj0 := Formula.and (Formula.eq b (.const 0)) φ'
let conj1 := Formula.and (Formula.eq b (.const 1)) Formula.top
let gadget := Formula.and boolB (Formula.or conj0 conj1)
let p0 := interpFormula (ρ.extend 0) gadget
let p1 := interpFormula (ρ.extend 1) gadget
p0.mul p1
end
/-! ### R1CS infrastructure ---------------------------------------------- -/
structure Wire where id : Nat
deriving Repr, DecidableEq, Ord
instance : Ord Wire := ⟨fun a b => compare a.id b.id⟩
namespace Wire
def X : Wire := ⟨0⟩
def one : Wire := ⟨1⟩
def zero : Wire := ⟨2⟩
end Wire
structure Constraint where A B C : RBMap Wire Rat compare deriving Repr
structure Ctx where
next : Nat := 3 -- after reserved
rows : List Constraint := []
powers : RBMap Nat Wire compare := {}
polyWires : RBMap Poly Wire compare := {}
namespace Ctx
def fresh : StateM Ctx Wire := do
let s ← get; set {s with next := s.next+1}; pure ⟨s.next⟩
def push (row : Constraint) : StateM Ctx Unit :=
modify fun s => {s with rows := row :: s.rows}
-- wires for X^k, cached
partial def getPower (k : Nat) : StateM Ctx Wire := do
let s ← get; match s.powers.find? k with
| some w => pure w
| none =>
if k=0 then pure Wire.one else
if k=1 then pure Wire.X else
let wPrev ← getPower (k-1)
let wk ← fresh
push {A := RBMap.singleton Wire.X 1,
B := RBMap.singleton wPrev 1,
C := RBMap.singleton wk 1}
modify fun s => {s with powers := s.powers.insert k wk}
pure wk
-- wires for arbitrary polynomial value
partial def getPolyWire (p : Poly) : StateM Ctx Wire := do
let s ← get; match s.polyWires.find? p with
| some w => pure w
| none =>
match p.isConst with
| some 0 => pure Wire.zero
| some 1 => pure Wire.one
| _ =>
let w ← fresh
compilePolyDef p w
modify fun s => {s with polyWires := s.polyWires.insert p w}
pure w
-- emit rows for Σ c_k X^k = w
partial def compilePolyDef (p : Poly) (w : Wire) : StateM Ctx Unit := do
let mut lin := RBMap.singleton w (-1)
for ⟨k,c⟩ in p.coeffs.toList do
let wk ← getPower k
lin := lin.insert wk (c + lin.findD wk 0)
push {A := lin, B := RBMap.singleton Wire.one 1, C := RBMap.empty}
end Ctx
/-- compile equality p=0 into rows -/
private def compilePolyEq (p : Poly) : StateM Ctx Unit := do
if p.isZero then return ()
let w ← Ctx.getPolyWire p
Ctx.push {A := RBMap.singleton w 1, B := RBMap.singleton Wire.one 1, C := RBMap.empty}
/-- substitute concrete a into a 1-bound formula (for ∀/∃ instantiation) -/
def substFormula {n} (φ : Formula (n+1)) (a : Rat) : Formula n :=
Formula.eq (Term.const ((interpFormula ⟨fun _ => a, []⟩ φ).evaluate 0)) (Term.const 0)
/-! full compilation ------------------------------------------------------ -/
open Ctx
mutual
partial def compileFormula (φ : Formula 0) (env : Env 0) : StateM Ctx Unit :=
match φ with
| .top => return ()
| .bot => compilePolyEq (Poly.const 1)
| .eq t u =>
let diff := (interpTerm env t).add (Poly.neg (interpTerm env u))
compilePolyEq diff
| .pred _ _ => compilePolyEq (Poly.const 1)
| .and φ ψ => compileFormula φ env >> compileFormula ψ env
| .or φ ψ => -- enforce wφ · wψ = 0
let pφ := interpFormula env φ; let pψ := interpFormula env ψ
let wφ ← getPolyWire pφ; let wψ ← getPolyWire pψ
push {A := RBMap.singleton wφ 1, B := RBMap.singleton wψ 1, C := RBMap.empty}
| .forall φ => -- all instantiations must be 0
for a in env.domain do compileFormula (substFormula φ a) env
| .exists φ => -- naive witness = first element
match env.domain with
| [] => compilePolyEq (Poly.const 1)
| a :: _ => compileFormula (substFormula φ a) env
| .notG φ =>
compilePolyEq (interpFormula env (.notG φ))
end
/-- Public entry: compile closed formula to R1CS rows. -/
def compileFormulaToR1CS (φ : Formula 0) (domain : List Rat := []) : List Constraint :=
let env : Env 0 := ⟨fun _ => 0, domain⟩
((compileFormula φ env).run {}).2.rows.reverse
/-! ### Pretty printer & validation -------------------------------------- -/
namespace Constraint
def termStr (w : Wire) (c : Rat) : String :=
let wS := if w = Wire.X then "X"
else if w = Wire.one then "1"
else if w = Wire.zero then "0"
else s!"w{w.id}"
if c = 1 then wS else if c = -1 then s!"-{wS}" else s!"{c}·{wS}"
def sideStr (m : RBMap Wire Rat compare) : String :=
if m.isEmpty then "0"
else String.intercalate " + " (m.toList.map (fun (w,c) => termStr w c))
def toString (c : Constraint) : String :=
s!"({sideStr c.A}) × ({sideStr c.B}) = {sideStr c.C}"
end Constraint
def validateR1CS (rows : List Constraint) (w : Wire → Rat) : Bool :=
rows.all fun c =>
let eval (m : RBMap Wire Rat compare) :=
m.fold (init:=0) fun acc i coeff => acc + coeff * w i
eval c.A * eval c.B = eval c.C
-------------------
Give my regards to Gabbay> I enjoyed reading the paper and wish you guys well with your project
Dao.cult retweeted
$CULT DAO FOUNDER @MrOmodulus HAS ALREADY DONE THAT.
#zkFOL a custom high-level language where smart contracts are written directly as first-order logic (FOL) predicates (logical conditions with quantifiers, relations, conjunctions, etc.).
These compile straight into polynomial constraints and ZK proofs
(using the Zinc/Zinc+ proving stack and arithmetisation techniques from Dr. Murdoch J. Gabbay’s work, who used to work with @IOHK_Charles in the past ).
There is no intermediate bytecode, virtual machine, or separate execution layer—the logical specification is the contract.
A state transition is accepted only if a proof shows the predicate holds.
The implementation is public on GitHub (github.com/zkFOL/zkfol), written primarily in Elixir (with Rust components for the prover).
Examples include compact predicates for things like Uniswap-style swaps or Sudoku solvers that can both check and generate solutions.
The claim is large performance gains over #zkVM s (orders of magnitude faster proving and lower memory) by skipping the VM emulation step.
This is the approach that IS ALREADY addressing intents-style verifiable conditions via cryptographic proofs, without the traditional smart-contract language + VM stack.
CARDANO $ADA FOUNDER CHARLES HOSKINSON IS DEVELOPING A NEW PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE FOR THE NETWORK TO ENABLE SMART CONTRACTS TO EXECUTE TRANSACTIONS AND VERIFY CONDITIONS USING CRYPTOGRAPHIC PROOFS
Dao.cult retweeted
Sounds familiar
CARDANO $ADA FOUNDER CHARLES HOSKINSON IS DEVELOPING A NEW PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE FOR THE NETWORK TO ENABLE SMART CONTRACTS TO EXECUTE TRANSACTIONS AND VERIFY CONDITIONS USING CRYPTOGRAPHIC PROOFS
Dao.cult retweeted
I’m conscious there are lots of people offering help in my DMs or tagging me in things & it’s appreciated, I just might be a little slow in coming back due to the amount of messages & things to review
Dao.cult retweeted
Exploring options such as @legiondotcc, @MetaDAOProject, @gitcoin & @punkdotfun. All have viable, but different offerings that could be feasible for @ModulusZK.
Dao.cult retweeted
Liquidity for RVLT/ETH on @QuickswapDEX has been burned.
polygonscan.com/tx/0x56d242d…





















