Update: Cost comparison table

bip-0442.md

@@ -147,8 +147,8 @@ using `OP_PAIRCOMMIT`.
 
 One way to think about the 3 opcodes (`OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK`, `OP_INTERNALKEY`,
 `OP_PAIRCOMMIT`) is we decompose a `OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK` variant that can use
-a 1-byte `OP_TRUE` public key (substituting for the *taproot internal key*) and can
-commit to a number of stack elements as a message.
+a 1-byte `OP_TRUE` public key (substituting for the *taproot internal key*) and
+can commit to a number of stack elements as a message.
 
 ### Behaviors LNhance tries to avoid introducing
 
@@ -175,18 +175,20 @@ various reasons, either for expanding the scope or for unnecessary complexity:
 
 ### Cost comparison of LN-Symmetry constructions
 
-| Method        | ChannelS | UpdateSc | UpdateWi | 1-Update  | 2-Update  |
-| :------------ | -------: | -------: | -------: | --------: | --------: |
-| APO-annex     |  2.25 vB | 28.25 vB |    25 vB |    305 vB |  461.5 vB |
-| APO-return    |  2.25 vB | 28.25 vB |  16.5 vB |  338.5 vB |  528.5 vB |
-| CTV+CSFS+IKEY |  2.75 vB | 12.25 vB |  24.5 vB |    331 vB |    513 vB |
-| CTV+CSFS      |    11 vB |  20.5 vB |  24.5 vB |  347.5 vB | 537.75 vB |
-| LNhance       |     3 vB |  12.5 vB | 32.75 vB | 297.75 vB | 446.25 vB |
-| rekey         |  7.25 vB | 16.75 vB | 73.75 vB | 347.25 vB |    541 vB |
+| Method        | ChannelSc | UpdateSc | UpdateW | ForceC  | Contest | Settle |
+| :------------ | --------: | -------: | ------: | ------: | ------: | :----: |
+| APO-Annex     |      8 WU |   113 WU |  100 WU | 1221 WU |  627 WU | SigOp  |
+| APO-Return    |      8 WU |   113 WU |   66 WU | 1359 WU |  765 WU | SigOp  |
+| CTV+CSFS+IKEY |     10 WU |    48 WU |   98 WU | 1328 WU |  732 WU |  CTV   |
+| CTV+CSFS      |     43 WU |    81 WU |   98 WU | 1394 WU |  765 WU |  CTV   |
+| LNhance       |     11 WU |    49 WU |  131 WU | 1191 WU |  594 WU |  CTV   |
+
+*ChannelSc: channel script, UpdateSc: update script, UpdateW: witness is the
+same size for both Force Close and Contest in LN-Symmetry, ForceC: total cost of unilateral close transactions*
 
 ### Proving general computation
 
-Merkle trees can be used to prove out computation where the root of the tree
+Merkle trees can be used to prove computation where the root of the tree
 represents the *function* and the leaves represent the *inputs* and *output*.
 There are practical limits to the entropy space for the *inputs* as they need
 to be iterated over and hashed into a merkle root.