P38 — Protocol Agnostic Deterministic Evidence Substrate

◎ OS PUB Apache 2.0 ← All specifications

AIEP — Protocol-Agnostic Deterministic Evidence Substrate

Field of the Invention

[0001] The invention relates to distributed computing systems requiring deterministic state control.

[0002] More particularly, the invention concerns a protocol-agnostic deterministic evidence substrate configured to enforce invariant-preserving state transitions within an Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP) system as defined in United Kingdom patent application GB2519711.2.

Background

[0003] The AIEP system defined in GB2519711.2 performs deterministic arbitration of canonicalised artefacts using structured divergence evaluation, registry-bound scoring rules, and fail-closed admissibility enforcement.

[0004] In distributed implementations, evidence submitted for arbitration may originate from heterogeneous external systems including:

(a) databases;

(b) application programming interfaces;

(d) document management systems;

(e) sensor networks;

(f) computational services.

[0005] Such systems frequently employ incompatible encodings, mutable identifiers, non-deterministic timestamp generation, protocol-specific metadata fields, and environment-dependent ordering semantics.

[0006] Direct ingestion of heterogeneous evidence into deterministic arbitration engines may produce divergent canonical artefact representations across distributed nodes despite identical logical evidence content.

[0007] Divergent artefact representations may result in:

(a) inconsistent admissibility determinations;

(b) inconsistent canonical scoring inputs;

(d) fragmentation of distributed arbitration state graphs.

[0008] In distributed arbitration systems, such divergence constitutes a machine-level state control failure rather than a mere formatting inconsistency.

[0009] There exists a need for a deterministic evidence ingress mechanism that eliminates protocol-induced state variance and guarantees cross-node state equivalence prior to arbitration invocation.

Summary of the Invention

[0010] The invention provides a Protocol-Agnostic Deterministic Evidence Substrate (PADES) operating as a structured pre-arbitration state-transition control layer within an AIEP distributed arbitration system.

[0011] The substrate comprises:

(a) a deterministic evidence normalisation engine;

(b) a registry-bound canonical schema binding module;

(d) a provenance binding controller;

(e) a version alignment verification engine; and

(f) a fail-closed admissibility and execution gating controller.

[0012] The substrate converts heterogeneous external evidence into immutable, content-addressable canonical artefacts under registry-defined transformation rules.

[0013] The substrate operates as a deterministic state-transition control mechanism governing arbitration invocation authority within the distributed AIEP system.

[0014] No arbitration process, scoring operation, or execution enablement signal may be generated unless canonical identity invariants and version alignment conditions are satisfied.

[0015] The invention thereby prevents cross-node execution divergence arising from heterogeneous protocol behaviour.

Detailed Description

Deterministic Evidence Normalisation

[0016] Incoming evidence from heterogeneous external systems is transformed into a structured intermediate representation according to versioned registry-defined transformation rules.

[0017] The normalisation engine removes or deterministically transforms non-invariant fields including:

(a) non-canonical timestamps;

(b) transport-layer metadata;

(d) ordering-sensitive container structures;

(e) volatile runtime attributes.

[0018] The transformation rules are version-identified and registry-bound.

[0019] Identical raw evidence processed under identical registry and transformation versions produces an identical intermediate representation across independent distributed nodes.

[0020] The normalisation process is deterministic and independent of runtime execution environment.

Canonical Schema Binding

[0021] The intermediate representation is mapped to a canonical AIEP evidence schema.

[0022] Each canonical schema is version-identified and cryptographically referenced within the registry.

[0023] Schema binding enforces invariant field ordering, typing, and structural determinism.

[0024] A schema version mismatch constitutes a deterministic pre-admissibility divergence condition.

Provenance Binding

[0025] Structured provenance metadata is bound into the canonical artefact prior to identity generation, including:

(a) source system identifier;

(b) canonicalised ingestion timestamp;

(d) schema version;

(e) registry version.

[0026] Provenance binding is deterministic and registry-governed.

[0027] Mutation of any provenance field invalidates artefact identity.

Cryptographic Identity Generation

[0028] After canonicalisation and provenance inclusion, the substrate generates a deterministic cryptographic identity for the artefact.

[0029] The artefact identity is computed as:

Hₑ = H(CanonicalEvidence || SchemaVersion || RegistryVersion || TransformationVersion)

[0030] The artefact identity is immutable and content-addressable.

[0031] Identical canonical evidence under identical schema, registry, and transformation versions yields identical identity across distributed nodes.

[0032] The cryptographic identity functions as a mandatory admissibility and execution precondition within the arbitration engine rather than as a passive archival reference.

Version Alignment Verification

[0033] Prior to arbitration invocation, the substrate verifies:

(a) recognition of registry version;

(b) compatibility of schema version;

(d) identity reconstruction equivalence.

[0034] Failure of any verification step results in deterministic transition to a non-admissible state.

Fail-Closed Execution Gating

[0035] The substrate operates as a machine-level pre-arbitration state controller.

[0036] Where canonicalisation fails, identity reconstruction fails, or version misalignment occurs, the system transitions to a non-executable state.

[0037] No arbitration decision, scoring operation, or ExecutionEnablementSignal may be generated absent successful invariant verification.

[0038] The substrate thereby enforces deterministic distributed execution consistency.

[0039] Unlike conventional extract-transform-load systems that permit downstream processing under partial normalisation, the present substrate enforces invariant verification as a mandatory precondition to distributed execution.

Deterministic Distributed Replay Guarantee

[0040] Where identical logical evidence is ingested under identical registry, schema, and transformation versions, independent AIEP nodes produce:

(a) identical canonical artefacts;

(b) identical cryptographic identities;

(d) identical arbitration enablement conditions.

[0041] The invention guarantees cross-node state equivalence and prevents fragmentation of deterministic arbitration lineage.

Technical Effect

[0042] The invention provides deterministic control of evidence state prior to arbitration within distributed computing systems.

[0043] The technical contribution lies in enforcing invariant-preserving canonical identity binding that prevents protocol-induced divergence in distributed state-machine execution.

[0044] The invention improves distributed execution integrity, reproducibility, and deterministic state transition control across heterogeneous protocol domains.

CLAIMS

1. A computer-implemented method operating within an Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP) distributed arbitration system as defined in United Kingdom patent application GB2519711.2, comprising:

(a) receiving heterogeneous external evidence from multiple protocol environments;

(b) transforming the evidence into a deterministic intermediate representation according to registry-bound transformation rules;

(d) binding structured provenance metadata within the canonical artefact;

(e) generating a cryptographic identity based on canonical evidence, schema version, registry version, and transformation rule version;

(f) verifying version alignment and identity reconstruction prior to arbitration invocation; and

(g) enforcing a fail-closed transition to a non-executable machine state upon canonicalisation failure or version misalignment,

wherein identical logical evidence under identical version conditions produces identical artefact identity and identical admissibility state across distributed nodes.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein non-invariant fields are deterministically removed or transformed prior to identity generation.

3. The method of claim 1 or claim 2, wherein arbitration execution enablement is cryptographically dependent on successful invariant verification.

4. The method of any preceding claim, wherein failure of canonical identity reconstruction disables generation of any downstream execution instruction within the distributed system.

5. A distributed computing system configured to perform the method of any preceding claim.

6. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed, perform the method of any preceding claim.

Abstract

A computer-implemented protocol-agnostic deterministic evidence substrate for use within a distributed Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP) arbitration system is disclosed. Heterogeneous external evidence from multiple protocol environments is transformed under versioned, registry-bound rules into a deterministic intermediate representation. The representation is bound to a canonical schema and structured provenance metadata prior to generation of a cryptographic identity derived from canonical evidence and version parameters. Prior to arbitration, schema compatibility and identity reconstruction are verified. Failure of canonicalisation or version alignment results in transition to a non-executable state preventing arbitration or execution enablement. Identical logical evidence processed under identical registry and schema conditions produces identical artefact identity and admissibility state across distributed nodes. The substrate thereby enforces invariant-preserving evidence identity and prevents protocol-induced divergence in distributed arbitration execution.

Brief Description of the Drawing

FIG. 1 — Cross-System Interoperability Bridge

   ┌──────────┐           AIEP           ┌──────────┐
   │ System A │ ◀────────protocol──────▶ │ System B │
   │  native  │          bridge          │  native  │
   │  schema  │                          │  schema  │
   └────┬─────┘                          └────┬─────┘
        │                                      │
   ┌────▼──────────────────────────────────────▼────┐
   │            Canonical AIEP Substrate            │
   │  • normalised records (deterministic form)     │
   │  • shared hash namespace                       │
   │  • schema-validated artefacts                  │
   │  • append-only audit trail                     │
   └─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘