Why is Zircuit considered a unique Layer 2?

Author: Haotian

Why is @ZircuitL2 said to be a maverick layer2? 1) It is built on the OP Stack Codebase but does not belong to the OP super chain camp? 2) Belonging to the OP-Rollup chain, yet not highlighting fraud proof, from the name to the technical details, it bears a strong ZK imprint? 3) Clearly unrelated to the AVS secure Consensus Mechanism, yet it has given Airdrop to $Eigen stakers and so on. Next, let me briefly explain my understanding of the Zircuit chain:

1. OP Stack obviously provides a fast layer2 basic technology framework, but many chains including Metis, Mantle, Zircuit, etc. have used OP Stack’s Codebase technology framework but have not been incorporated into Superchain’s strategic roadmap.

The reason is simple. Although Super Chain will enjoy the resource benefits of the OP Super Alliance, it will also be limited in technical autonomy and flexibility, such as fraud proof. Many OP Stack camps have not fully implemented the Fraud Proof system for layer2, and the correlation with their choice of framework dependency and neglect of autonomous development will be significant.

Zircuit is a typical example. Although it is labeled as OP-Rollup Type on L2beat, its overall technical architecture and brand tonality give people a strong sense of ZK perception, and many people will categorize it into the scope of ZK-Rollup.

The reason for preferring the ZK technology framework is mainly because the blessing of ZK technology can make the OP-Rollup framework more reliable. After all, without a truly operating Fraud Proof, it is difficult to call OP-Rollup a secure and reliable chain. However, with the ZK Proof system, the trust environment of state changes built on ZK technology can well compensate for its shortcomings in optimistic challenge proof. Strictly speaking, it should belong to a mixed Rollup.

In fact, this kind of hybrid Rollup architecture design is not new, and it is also a new layer2

@MetisL2

Also based on this differentiation, ZK-Rollup Router provides users with a fast withdrawal channel without waiting for the 7-day challenge period.

2. Recently, Vitalik praised Starknet’s performance in optimizing Blob Gas pricing mechanism and compressing Block states. This is actually another direction of optimization after enhancing Cross-Chain Interaction operability in layer2: enhancing its own data structure and performance handling details.

As the upgrade path of the ETH mainnet in the future will tend towards ZK-SNARKs lightening, if the layer2 chain can be proficient in applying ZK technology at the underlying level, there will be enhanced performance in terms of data structure, state compression, message transmission, etc., which will be closer to the future Rollup-Centric strategic direction.

So, as a rising star, Zircuit made a lot of technical optimizations in the early stage of chain launching, such as:

1. Sequencer level security enhancement (SLS): Many layer2 chains face various troubles such as centralization of Sequencer, MEV, etc., so that Decentralized Finance such financial application protocols have not been able to achieve stable development in the layer2 environment.

Therefore, Zircuit’s original preventive security architecture design for Sequencer includes monitoring for malicious transactions in the Mempool, and malicious transactions will be isolated in a quarantine area with multiple release conditions to ensure the smooth and secure execution of normal transactions. This method of adding a security pre-check layer in the Sequencer component can identify potential MEV behaviors and provide a fairer execution environment for Decentralized Finance applications.

2. Modular Proof System: The layer2 chain of the ZK-Rollup paradigm has obvious finality advantages compared to the OP-Rollup chain, but at the same time, it will incur additional costs for computing, generating, and verifying Proofs. This cost is not within the scope of Mainnet through Blobs Blockdrop layer2 Gas, so the ZK-Rollup layer2 needs to find a way to drop the cost of ZK Proofs.

In this regard, ZIrcuit adopts two paths of Template Proofs and Proof Aggregation to optimize costs: Template proof is a transitional solution, using a simplified proof template to maintain the update verification of the basic state, without having to generate a complete proof for each batch to drop costs; Proof aggregation will collect multiple unverified proof tasks to be generated in parallel through specific circuits and general circuits, and finally aggregate these proofs into a single proof for unified verification.

Obviously, this kind of setting specific proprietary circuits to adapt to different proof types of the Proof system can effectively reduce the cost of ZK proof generation and verification. This is similar to the adoption of STARK system by Starknet, recursive system by zkSync, etc., which can reduce ZK overhead.

3. AI-Enabled layer2: As a relatively new layer2 chain, Zircuit is naturally suitable for integrating AI models, AI Agents, and other AI elements. This is reflected in the SLS sequencer’s AI model analysis of suspicious transactions, automated isolation or temporary suspension of special AI cases, and so on.

Above.

As for why Zircuit is collaborating with @Eigenlayer to airdrop, it’s hard to see purely from a technical perspective. I’d rather understand this as a strategic support from Zircuit’s layer2 for Eigenlayer’s output of ETH AVS security.

Taking a longer-term view, AVS, as a fast and secure Consensus infrastructure, may help Zircuit’s SSL system quickly integrate into other layer2 ecosystems at some point in time.