It's not that you're computing am an inner product argument within the recursive proof. It's that you're folding together am two arguments, a, in such a way that if the import arguments were valid, then the output argument will be valid too. So it'sou you do have this reduction step from two to one, but it's not thatYou're reducing the two iner p documents, of the mo inerpo arguments from the profs you're checking into this new one. You're just checking them in a way that means you have to produce a proof that itself has't a separate inner product argument that it generates. And i think we can say there was no trusted

Get the Snipd
podcast app

Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
App store bannerPlay store banner

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode

Save any
moment

Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways

Share
& Export

Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more

AI-powered
podcast player

Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features

Discover
highlights

Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode