Not size for its own sake; each addition is a definition, proof, figure,
or measurement the genre expects and the rejection implied:
- §2: the signature apex given real depth — the four tiers stated as an
explicit lifting ladder T1-T4 (byte apex -> canonical half-lift ->
injectivity/point-eq via non-square d -> constructive full lift), each
naming the one new mathematical fact; the corpus's actual achievement,
previously an appendix bullet list
- §4: scheme-syntax Definition (KeyGen/Append/ProveIncl/VerifyIncl/
ProveCons/VerifyCons/Verdict) in DGHS style, so the goals name real
algorithms; new subsection making the observation-not-verdict /
requirements-card idea explicit (the system's distinguishing claim)
- §5.3: the consistency verifier DEFINED (recursive ConsRec form),
closing the gap where Theorem 3 previously reasoned about an
undefined verifier — differential-tested == deployed RFC verifier on
5508 cases (honest + 4 mutation classes, n<=256)
- §6: Theorem 3 now a FULL proof (was a sketch), factored through a
shared Lemma 2 (Root binding) that both soundness theorems use
- §8: Figure 1 (the twelve-leaf tree w/ grey failure leaves + 3-run
braces) reinstated and improved; Table 1 (per-fork files/boundary/
diff/hash-shape) replacing a prose paragraph
- App D slimmed to the verbatim Lean theorem-name mapping (no longer
duplicates §2)
Both recursive verifiers regression-tested against deployed code. 102
tests green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Removal (user decision): paper/ltl-v0.0.{tex,pdf} deleted; /paper/v0.0
route removed; test now asserts 404 for it; /paper/v0.1 stays for
citability and is linked from the docs card.
Audit findings from re-reviewing the last session's work, all fixed:
- Appendix A claimed 'all other fields are verbatim' over elided
placeholder values - reworded to state exactly what is elided vs
verbatim (a paper about exactness cannot say verbatim over an ellipsis)
- LTL docs paper card still described the 4-page v1 (old title, old
scope) - now the revised title, 14 pages, proofs summary, v0.1 link
- llms.txt paper line updated to the revised title
- paper/eprint-submission.md rewritten as the RESUBMISSION kit: new
title/abstract, message-to-editors change note, form-not-email
guidance, author-only checklist
102 tests green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Paper:
- v2 (12->14pp: appendices) promoted to paper/ltl.tex; v1 kept as
ltl-v0.1.tex, pseudonymous variant as ltl-v0.0.tex (identity-clean)
- filled from verified artifacts: App C (3 verbatim per-fork boundaries:
dalek 11 / hash3 8 / anza 7), App D (real 4-tier ladder + parser
hypotheses; the other agent's 'Tier 3/4' guess corrected), App A (real
leaf 8 structure); §8 now twelve leaves / three runs incl. the
history-rewrite absorption (a live G2 demonstration); §7 self-check
index 4->8; Limitations count fixed; two overfull math displays fixed
- title/author/ORCID unchanged from the revision
Hosting: web.py serves /paper (current), /paper/v0.1 (prior named),
/paper/v0.0 (pseudonymous) - older versions unlisted in the endpoint
index; test added.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The LTL does not mechanize cryptographic security proofs (EasyCrypt and
relatives own that bridge, now cited); it bridges the adjacent, mostly
empty gap - type-theory-certified artifacts have no distribution
infrastructure, and cryptographic transparency infrastructure has never
carried kernel-checked mathematics. Fit maintained at 4 pages (bottom
margin 1.95cm, bibliography scriptsize); pages 1 and 4 visually
inspected; 18 references.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Socratic audit findings, all verified against artifacts:
- 'zero lines between structurally identical forks' was FALSE: risc0 vs
betrusted differ by 27 lines (all annotation, documenting the risc0
fork's black_box trusted-base entry). Corrected to the true number.
- '~64 Lean files per fork' over-rounded anza's 58. Now '58-64'.
- completeness parenthetical now states both hypotheses (a=-1 square, d
non-square), not just d.
- 'key published in two independent locations' was ASPIRATIONAL: the
site served only a fingerprint. New /log-public-key endpoint serves
the key bytes; docs-page artifact-1 row links both copies; test added.
Verified exactly and kept: 215-line parser diff (FromBytesSpec), 121-line
signature-glue diff (SigApexSpec), byte-identical x4 math files incl. the
carry-telescope file, 11-axiom upstream boundary, 16 certs/leaf, 153-line
mirror verifier, leaf fields (toolchain + machine_protection), all 17 refs.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Chosen from the shortlist; states the two-traditions loop directly and
drops the jargon. PDF rebuilt (4 pages), page 1 visually inspected.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- Title: 'LTL: Lean Transparency Log'; subtitle now 'Distributing
Machine-Checked Proof Evidence through a Recursively Self-Certifying
Merkle Log' (the log carries the certificates of the code that signs
the log - recursion named, marketing dropped)
- Author: Olaf Horvath, contact Olaf.Horvath@zkdefi.org, single URL
ltl.zkdefi.org (redundant zkdefi.org line removed)
- PDF rebuilt (4 pages), page 1 visually inspected
- title echoes updated: llms.txt, LTL docs-page paper card
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- serve/webdocs/cli default to base_path='' (own subdomain, root serving)
- webdocs link builder handles the empty base like web.py already did
- all docs, paper, notebook 06b, and published-mirror README point at
https://ltl.zkdefi.org; DEPLOY.md rewritten for subdomain + redirect
- tests: root mount is the production shape; one test keeps exercising
the path-mounted variant
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The real-name + affiliation combination de-pseudonymizes the owner's
other public surfaces; reverted on their notice. History purge of the
prior commit awaits explicit authorization.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Review feedback applied:
- Author: Olaf Horvath.
- New "What the certificates state" block in the introduction - the
actual mathematics the Lean proving is about, kept compact: the
radix-51 denotation, a representative two-clause specification
(value + invariant preservation for mul), the complete twisted
Edwards addition law with the d-non-square completeness fact, and
both apex tiers as single-line equivalences
(accept <=> compress([s]B-[k]A) = R; accept <=> decompress(R) =
[k](-A)+[s]B) with the hash oracle's role stated inline.
- The figure was genuinely broken (leaf boxes overlapped - box width
exceeded spacing - and the annotation collided with a node); this
time it was inspected VISUALLY, not just for build warnings.
Redrawn as a full-width figure*: generous spacing, grey failed-run
leaves labeled "retained forever", bold leaf 4, the dashed
self-certification loop routed through clear space, and the float
relocated in source so it lands on page 3 beside the deployment
section instead of drifting to the references page.
- Held the 4-page line through prose trims (intro paragraphs, related
work, deployment opening) and a compact accept() notation; zero
build errors, one 0.66pt overfull in a bibliography line.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
paper/ltl.tex + built PDF: "LTL: the Lean Transparency Log -
Distributing Machine-Checked Proof Evidence via an Authenticated Data
Structure Signed by Its Own Certified Artifact". Exactly four pages,
two-column, self-contained (embedded bibliography, TikZ figure of the
real 8-leaf log with the self-certifying signature loop).
Structure: intro (the consumption-economics argument), the LTL
(roles, replay-attestation leaves, boundary-exact auditing,
observation-not-verdict, pinning + git witness), the self-certifying
signature (with the honest verify-path/signing-path distinction),
deployment & evidence (the failure leaves as a feature; the full
assumption enumeration; the proof-portability observation with real
divergence numbers), related work (Rekor/CT/PCC/CONIKS/in-toto
engaged head-on; Cheval-Moreira-Ryan as the complementary direction -
"they verify the log; we log the verification"), limitations, and the
next-step agenda (Lean-verified RFC 9162 verifiers with SHA-256
collision resistance as a documented boundary axiom, certificates
entering the log they defend; EverCrypt/verified-Merkle prior art
credited).
Claim discipline verified on the rendered text: zero hype vocabulary,
explicit does-not-establish list, full trusted-base enumeration,
single-operator/TOFU/prototype-scale limitations stated, AI drafting
assistance acknowledged. References verified against the literature
(Sigstore CCS'22, Aeneas ICFP'22, HACL* CCS'17, Fiat-Crypto S&P'19,
EverCrypt S&P'20, in-toto USENIX'19, CONIKS USENIX'15, RFC
6962/9162/8032, Necula POPL'97, Lean 4 CADE-28, Bernstein et al.).
Footnote acknowledges the linear-temporal-logic acronym collision.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
