This paper addresses the efficiency of pairing-based non-interactive arguments (SNARGs) and succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge (SNARKs). The authors present a pairing-based SNARK for arithmetic circuit satisfiability, which is an NP-complete language. This SNARK uses asymmetric pairings, resulting in a proof consisting of only 3 group elements and verification involving a single pairing product equation with 3 pairings. The construction is zero-knowledge and secure in the generic bilinear group model, with additional security in the symmetric pairing setting. The paper also proves that pairing-based SNARGs with a single group element proof cannot exist, providing a lower bound for such arguments. This result answers an open question raised by Bitansky et al. regarding linear interactive proofs (LIPs) and their decision procedures. The authors demonstrate the practical efficiency of their construction through performance comparisons, showing superior results in terms of proof size, common reference string size, prover's computation, verifier's computation, and number of pairing product equations used. The paper contributes to the field by offering a more efficient and secure pairing-based SNARK construction and by establishing lower bounds for pairing-based SNARGs.This paper addresses the efficiency of pairing-based non-interactive arguments (SNARGs) and succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge (SNARKs). The authors present a pairing-based SNARK for arithmetic circuit satisfiability, which is an NP-complete language. This SNARK uses asymmetric pairings, resulting in a proof consisting of only 3 group elements and verification involving a single pairing product equation with 3 pairings. The construction is zero-knowledge and secure in the generic bilinear group model, with additional security in the symmetric pairing setting. The paper also proves that pairing-based SNARGs with a single group element proof cannot exist, providing a lower bound for such arguments. This result answers an open question raised by Bitansky et al. regarding linear interactive proofs (LIPs) and their decision procedures. The authors demonstrate the practical efficiency of their construction through performance comparisons, showing superior results in terms of proof size, common reference string size, prover's computation, verifier's computation, and number of pairing product equations used. The paper contributes to the field by offering a more efficient and secure pairing-based SNARK construction and by establishing lower bounds for pairing-based SNARGs.