mrwulf b7c8c58529 paper: depth pass to IACR standard (no padding) — 14->17pp ...

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>

2026-07-09 19:27:13 +02:00

547 KiB

Raw History