Why is Zircuit considered an independent Layer 2?
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
Why is Zircuit considered an independent Layer 2?
As a relatively new Layer 2 chain, Zircuit is naturally suited for integrating AI elements such as AI model inference and AI agents.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsBy Haotian
Binance Alpha announced the listing of Zircuit on June 3, 2025—over seven months after the ZRC token’s initial launch. After a long period out of the spotlight, Zircuit has once again become a market focal point. Let’s revisit what sets Zircuit apart from other Layer2 projects.
This article was first published on November 26, 2024.
Why is @ZircuitL2 considered an unconventional Layer2? 1) It's built on the OP Stack codebase but isn't part of the OP Superchain ecosystem? 2) Though classified as an OP-Rollup, it downplays fraud proofs and instead bears strong ZK branding—from its name to technical details? 3) Despite having no direct link to AVS security consensus mechanisms, it still airdropped tokens to $Eigen stakers? Below is my take on Zircuit:
1) The OP Stack clearly provides a foundational technical framework for rapidly launching Layer2s, yet multiple chains—including Metis, Mantle, and Zircuit—have adopted the OP Stack codebase without joining the Superchain's strategic roadmap.
The reason is simple: while joining the Superchain offers access to resources from the OP coalition, it also limits technical autonomy and flexibility—such as around fraud proofs. Many OP Stack-based Layer2s still haven’t fully deployed functional Fraud Proof systems, largely due to their prioritization of framework dependency over independent development.
Zircuit is a prime example. Although labeled as an OP-Rollup on L2beat, its overall technical architecture and brand identity project a distinctly ZK-like impression, leading many to categorize it under ZK-Rollups.
The preference for ZK technology stems from its ability to enhance the reliability of the OP-Rollup framework. An OP-Rollup without operational Fraud Proofs struggles to be deemed secure or trustworthy. However, by integrating a ZK Proof system, Zircuit leverages ZK-based state transition trust to effectively compensate for weaknesses in optimistic challenge mechanisms. Strictly speaking, it should thus be classified as a hybrid Rollup.
In fact, this hybrid Rollup architecture isn’t novel—@MetisL2, another emerging Layer2, similarly differentiates itself using ZK-Rollup Router technology to offer users faster withdrawal exits, bypassing the standard 7-day challenge period.
2) Recently, Vitalik praised Starknet’s improvements in blob gas pricing and block state compression—indicating a new optimization direction beyond cross-chain interoperability: enhancing internal data structures and performance efficiency.
As Ethereum’s future upgrades trend toward lightweight ZK-SNARKs, Layer2s that master ZK technology at the foundational level—improving data structures, state compression, message passing, etc.—will better align with the overarching Rollup-Centric vision.
As a newcomer, Zircuit implemented numerous technical optimizations from day one, including:
1. Sequencer-Level Security (SLS): Many Layer2 chains suffer from centralized sequencers and MEV-related issues, hindering stable DeFi protocol development within Layer2 environments.
To address this, Zircuit introduced a preventive security architecture for its sequencer. Transactions in the mempool undergo monitoring for malicious behavior. Suspicious transactions are placed in a quarantine zone with multi-release conditions, ensuring safe execution of legitimate transactions. This pre-execution security check within the sequencer helps identify potential MEV activities and provides a fairer execution environment for DeFi applications.
2. Modular Proof System: ZK-Rollup-based Layer2s have a clear finality advantage over OP-Rollups, but they incur additional computational costs in generating and verifying proofs. These expenses fall outside the scope of mainnet blob-based gas reductions for Layer2s, so ZK-Rollups must find ways to minimize proof overhead.
To tackle this, Zircuit employs two strategies: Template Proofs and Proof Aggregation. Template Proofs serve as an interim solution—using simplified templates to validate basic state updates without generating full proofs for every batch, thereby reducing costs. Proof Aggregation collects multiple unverified proof tasks and processes them in parallel via specialized and general-purpose circuits, eventually combining them into a single proof for unified verification.
Clearly, designing dedicated circuits tailored to different proof types can significantly reduce the cost of ZK proof generation and validation. This approach is similar to Starknet’s use of STARKs and zkSync’s recursive systems, all aimed at lowering ZK-related overhead.
3. AI-Enabled Layer2: As a newer Layer2 chain, Zircuit is naturally suited for integrating AI elements such as model inference and AI agents. For instance, AI models within the SLS sequencer analyze suspicious transactions, and special circumstances can trigger automated AI-driven isolation or protocol pauses.
That’s all.
As for why Zircuit partnered with @Eigenlayer on the airdrop, it’s hard to justify purely from a technical standpoint. I prefer to interpret it as Zircuit’s strategic endorsement of EigenLayer’s provision of Ethereum AVS security.
Taken from a broader perspective, AVS—as a fast-evolving security consensus infrastructure—might one day enable Zircuit’s SSL system to quickly integrate with other Layer2 ecosystems.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
Haotian | CryptoInsight
