LibraryConfidential compute2024Design paperCorpus record
SP1: a zkVM for RISC-V programs
SP1. Succinct.
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
A reading of the project's public design document. Not a copy, not a benchmark, and not an offer.
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
- Evidence
- Primary paper
- Re-measured
- No
- Assumptions
- 3
- Records linked
- 5
01 Claim ledger
What the paper is allowed to say
Each row is a sentence already in the study. The status is the same on every row: a model claim, not a live measurement.
Claim 01 · Paper model
The defect
Two RISC-V zkVMs are not interchangeable. The image identity and the verifier keys differ.
Claim 02 · Paper model
The proposal
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
Claim 03 · Paper model
The mechanism
The program is identified by an image. A proof for a different image is a proof of a different program, even if the source looks similar.
Claim 04 · Paper model
The bound
No cycle count and no cost is stated here.
02 Three cuts
Observation, model, falsifier
A desk does not stop at the summary. Each claim is cut three ways, using only this study's own assumptions and checks. Nothing here is a new figure.
01 The defect
Observation
What the study says
Two RISC-V zkVMs are not interchangeable. The image identity and the verifier keys differ.
Model
What has to hold
You are reading the SP1 introduction. A particular proving cluster's uptime is not the VM.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which verifier is on the settlement chain: the zkVM verifier or a wrapper?
02 The proposal
Observation
What the study says
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
Model
What has to hold
The document is the one at the source URL. A marketing page with the same brand is not this text.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which verifier is on the settlement chain: the zkVM verifier or a wrapper?
03 The mechanism
Observation
What the study says
The program is identified by an image. A proof for a different image is a proof of a different program, even if the source looks similar.
Model
What has to hold
The document is the one at the source URL. A marketing page with the same brand is not this text.
Falsifier
What would retire it
What image id does the application expect?
04 The bound
Observation
What the study says
No cycle count and no cost is stated here.
Model
What has to hold
You are reading the SP1 introduction. A particular proving cluster's uptime is not the VM.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which verifier is on the settlement chain: the zkVM verifier or a wrapper?
03 Sequence
One action, as an operating tape
- 01The program is identified by an image. A proof for a different image is a proof of a different program, even if the source looks similar.
- 02A wrapper proof attests the zkVM proof. The wrapper is what a chain verifies when the zkVM proof is too heavy. Both statements have to be the right ones.
- 03Precompiles for hash or signature operations change the cost model. They do not change what 'this program ran' means, unless they change the VM.
04 Load-bearing
The argument, and where a pitch drops it
What the name has to mean
The cut
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
Why it carries weight
If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.
Where it is dropped
SP1 is not RISC Zero's receipt format.
What actually moves
The cut
A wrapper proof attests the zkVM proof. The wrapper is what a chain verifies when the zkVM proof is too heavy. Both statements have to be the right ones.
Why it carries weight
If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.
Where it is dropped
A proof does not attest that the inputs were fetched honestly from some website.
What a later deployment may change
The cut
Precompiles for hash or signature operations change the cost model. They do not change what 'this program ran' means, unless they change the VM.
Why it carries weight
If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.
Where it is dropped
A later client, parameter or reward formula is a different object from this paragraph.
05 Register
What has to be true
Model · Not re-measured
You are reading the SP1 introduction. A particular proving cluster's uptime is not the VM.
Model · Not re-measured
The document is the one at the source URL. A marketing page with the same brand is not this text.
Model · Not re-measured
No price, supply, yield, or adoption figure is added by this desk.
06 Divergence
What happened after the paper
A proof does not attest that the inputs were fetched honestly from some website.
A later client, parameter set, or reward formula is a different object. Cite this paper for the mechanism. Cite a primary release for the network. This desk has not re-run the proof.
07 Pre-mortem
What to check before you use the idea
- 0 of 3 marked on this browser. A mark is a reading note, not a pass, a rating, or a recommendation.
08 Anatomy
The paper, in the order a builder needs
The problem it names
Two RISC-V zkVMs are not interchangeable. The image identity and the verifier keys differ.
What the design proposes
- The program is identified by an image. A proof for a different image is a proof of a different program, even if the source looks similar.
- A wrapper proof attests the zkVM proof. The wrapper is what a chain verifies when the zkVM proof is too heavy. Both statements have to be the right ones.
- Precompiles for hash or signature operations change the cost model. They do not change what 'this program ran' means, unless they change the VM.
How the mechanism is specified
- The program is identified by an image. A proof for a different image is a proof of a different program, even if the source looks similar.
- A wrapper proof attests the zkVM proof. The wrapper is what a chain verifies when the zkVM proof is too heavy. Both statements have to be the right ones.
- Precompiles for hash or signature operations change the cost model. They do not change what 'this program ran' means, unless they change the VM.
What this page does not treat as proven
- No cycle count and no cost is stated here.
- SP1 is not RISC Zero's receipt format.
- A proof does not attest that the inputs were fetched honestly from some website.
Why the desk still reads it
SP1 publishes a zkVM that proves RISC-V execution, with a receipt a Groth16 or PLONK wrapper can compress for a settlement contract.
09 Lexicon
Terms, opened into the record
- Image id
- The commitment to the program being proved.
- Wrapper proof
- A second proof whose statement is that the zkVM proof verified. It is a different circuit.
10 Repository
Every linked record on this page
Underlined words open a page that already exists: a concept, a protocol profile, a failure record, or another paper. If a word is not underlined, this desk does not have a record for it.
Concepts
This is Blockchain Lab's reading of a public design paper. It is not the paper, not a copy of it, and not an offer of tokens, equity, custody or a partnership. Later network behaviour can diverge from the text. Nothing here is investment, legal or technical advice.
Research status: Design paper. Last reviewed: 1 October 2026. This is a reading of a public paper, not investment, legal or security advice.