Current: signed commitments
Block-body and transition-trace commitments bind the recorded material. Validators establish correctness through deterministic re-execution, not a succinct proof alone.
The path toward succinct verification
Stronger proofs, one defined scope at a time.
Sigil’s proof roadmap moves from signed commitments toward receipt-level and block-level succinct verification with explicit workload boundaries.
Zero-Knowledge RoadmapIllustrated study
Source / fingerprint / attribution
An anchor identifies a record. It does not prove every claim.
01 / Built for a purpose
A proving system needs a precise statement.
Proving a narrow deterministic computation is different from proving every contract or GPU inference job. Sigil’s roadmap separates those scopes so each can earn its own verification path and acceptance evidence.
First scope: deterministic receipts
The receipt-level design targets a CPU-deterministic subset of compute work. Proving-stack selection and measurements are part of that work.
Next scope: transfer-only blocks
A staged block-proof design begins with a constrained state-transition subset. Narrow scope makes the claimed statement and its verifier easier to evaluate.
Later scope: broader execution
Proofs covering general contract execution depend on proving-stack maturity. GPU and model workloads also need verification appropriate to their execution model.
The details matterGood questions.
Good questions.
Clear answers.
Does Sigil ship a Jolt verifier today?
No. The existing Jolt identifier is reserved and does not establish a production verifier. Current block commitments should be described as signed hash commitments.
Do TEE and Lumen verification wait for this roadmap?
They are separate verification approaches with different guarantees and activation conditions. Neither should be labeled a zero-knowledge proof of full model execution.
Keep exploringOne capability.