First time posting here.
I’ve been trying to understand how far CSFS-style script constructions can go in terms of adaptor-like behavior at the execution level.
I put together a small A/B/C experiment:
Roughly:
a structured reveal → extract relation (r = s - e, r·G == R) can be constructed, it’s mutation-sensitive, and has fairly clear failure boundaries.
What I tested is a CSFS-based structured construction where explicit-message verification passes and an adaptor-like reveal/extract relation holds.
One thing worth noting upfront: in this harness, the adaptor scalar and the Schnorr signature are computed in separate paths. So this is an execution-structure result, not a cryptographic coupling proof.
The more interesting point shows up in Checkpoint C (Boundary 3):
without a uniquely pre-committed R, multiple (s, R) pairs can satisfy the relation.
This suggests the binding behavior here is a property of execution structure, not of the signature scheme itself.