Update 04-Approach.tex

Author: Maltesius

report/src/sections/04-Approach.tex

@@ -136,7 +136,7 @@ \subsubsection*{Prover Computation}
 
 At the end of the recursive round, on line 31,~$n$ is updated to the length of the concatenated vectors before starting a new round.
 
-The result of this is a proof,~$\mathbf{\pi}$, constructed in $\lceil \log n \rceil$ rounds, but with the proof size being smaller than if the shuffle size was a power of two.
+The result of this is a proof,~$\mathbf{\pi}$, constructed in $\lceil \log n \rceil$ rounds.
 
 In step 3, lines 32--36, the folded vectors of size 1 are added to the proof as values as well as the commitments to the blinding values,~$B_C$ and~$B_D$.
 The proof, folded vectors, and updated commitment are saved for the verifier to use for verification.
@@ -423,4 +423,4 @@ \subsubsection{Size Reduction}
     \item A Discrete Logarithm Equivalence Proof on the ownership of the elected proposer's commitment (two G1 points, two Fr scalars $\Rightarrow2\cdot48+2\cdot32=160$ bytes).
 \end{itemize}
 The majority of the block overhead comes from the list of shuffled trackers.
-Hence, as the list size is heavily dependent on~$\ell$, using CAAUrdleproofs could majorly decrease the block overhead by allowing~$\ell$ to be more flexibly chosen as a smaller size than 128.
+Hence, as the list size is heavily dependent on~$\ell$, using CAAUrdleproofs could majorly decrease the block overhead by allowing~$\ell$ to be more flexibly chosen as a smaller size than 128.