AIEP — Deterministic Branch Pruning and Collapse Mechanism with Invariant-Bound Negative Proof Certification
Field of The Invention
[0001] The present invention relates to deterministic state management in distributed computing systems.
[0002] More particularly, the invention relates to a deterministic branch pruning and collapse mechanism for use within an Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP) system as defined in United Kingdom patent application GB2519711.2.
Background
[0003] Deterministic arbitration systems may generate multiple candidate state branches during execution cycles.
[0004] Persistent retention of all branches may result in unbounded state growth, increased computational overhead, and reduced system scalability.
[0005] Conventional pruning mechanisms frequently delete or overwrite non-dominant branches without preserving lineage integrity.
[0006] Destructive deletion prevents reconstruction of prior state space and may compromise replay certification.
[0007] Known systems lack a deterministic pruning mechanism that preserves genealogical integrity while providing negative proof of pruned branches.
[0008] There exists a need for a pruning mechanism that:
(a) deterministically selects branches for pruning;
(b) preserves non-destructive lineage;
(c) generates certifiable negative proof of pruning; and
(d) maintains invariant-bound execution control.
Summary Of The Invention
[0009] The invention provides a computer-implemented method for deterministic branch pruning within a distributed arbitration substrate.
[0010] Branches are persisted as immutable append-only entries within a genealogical structure.
[0011] A schema-defined PruningPolicy specifies criteria for pruning eligibility.
[0012] Pruning eligibility may be determined based on:
(a) branch weight comparison;
(b) inactivity duration;
(c) threshold delta relative to dominant branch;
(d) schema-bound classification rules.
[0013] Eligible branches are transitioned to a PRUNED state without destructive deletion.
[0014] A PruningCertificate is generated documenting:
(a) branch identifier;
(b) pruning criteria applied;
(c) pruning timestamp artefact;
(d) parent lineage reference;
(e) negative proof hash.
[0015] Negative proof hash binds the pruned branch identifier to the pruning event.
[0016] ExecutionEnablementSignal generation is contingent upon deterministic application of PruningPolicy.
[0017] The technical effect is controlled state space reduction while preserving deterministic replay capability and lineage integrity.
Definitions
[0018] PruningPolicy: A schema-defined rule set governing branch pruning eligibility.
[0019] PRUNED state: A non-executable state designation indicating that a branch is no longer eligible for activation while remaining preserved in the genealogical structure.
[0020] PruningCertificate: An append-only artefact recording deterministic pruning application.
[0021] NegativeProofHash: A cryptographic hash computed over canonical data representing a pruned branch and applied pruning criteria.
Brief Description Of The Drawings
[0022] Figure 1 illustrates a genealogical branch structure prior to pruning.
[0023] Figure 2 illustrates deterministic pruning eligibility evaluation.
[0024] Figure 3 illustrates generation of a PruningCertificate.
[0025] Figure 4 illustrates fail-closed enforcement during pruning.
Detailed Description Of Preferred Embodiments
Persistent Branch Structure
[0026] All branches are stored as immutable append-only entries.
[0027] Each branch comprises a canonical serialised state, ParentHash, branch identifier, weight value, and status indicator.
[0028] Status indicators comprise at least ACTIVE, ARCHIVED, REACTIVATED, and PRUNED.
Pruning Eligibility Determination
[0029] PruningPolicy is defined within a canonical schema.
[0030] PruningPolicy evaluation is deterministic.
[0031] Eligibility criteria may include:
(a) branch weight below a defined threshold;
(b) branch inactivity exceeding a defined duration;
(c) relative delta from dominant branch exceeding a threshold;
(d) branch classification constraints.
[0032] Eligibility evaluation occurs in canonical branch order.
[0033] Nodes operating over identical artefact sets produce identical pruning decisions.
Pruning Transition
[0034] Eligible branches transition from ACTIVE or ARCHIVED state to PRUNED state.
[0035] No branch is destructively deleted.
[0036] PRUNED branches are excluded from future activation cycles unless explicitly re-authorised by schema-defined mechanisms.
Negative Proof Certification
[0037] For each pruned branch, a PruningCertificate is generated.
[0038] PruningCertificate comprises:
(a) branch identifier;
(b) canonical serialised branch state hash;
(c) applied PruningPolicy identifier;
(d) timestamp artefact;
(e) NegativeProofHash.
[0039] NegativeProofHash is computed over canonical concatenation of branch identifier, pruning criteria, and schema version.
[0040] PruningCertificate is appended to the genealogical structure.
Fail-Closed Enforcement
[0041] ExecutionEnablementSignal generation requires deterministic application of PruningPolicy.
[0042] Non-deterministic or inconsistent pruning decisions result in fail-closed suppression.
[0043] Pruned branches cannot bypass invariant validation.
Distributed Operation
[0044] Nodes with identical schema versions and artefact sets produce identical PRUNED branch sets.
[0045] PruningCertificates are reproducible across distributed nodes.
[0046] Divergence in pruning decisions is detectable through comparison of NegativeProofHash values.
Technical Effect
[0047] The invention reduces state growth while preserving append-only genealogical integrity.
[0048] The invention provides deterministic pruning reproducible across distributed nodes.
[0049] The invention generates certifiable negative proof of pruning decisions.
[0050] The invention improves scalability without sacrificing replay certification capability.
[0051] The invention prevents silent or destructive branch deletion.
CLAIMS
1. A computer-implemented method for deterministic branch pruning within a distributed arbitration system operating under an Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP), the method comprising:
(a) persisting branches as immutable append-only entries within a genealogical structure;
(b) applying a schema-defined PruningPolicy to determine pruning eligibility;
(c) transitioning eligible branches to a PRUNED state without destructive deletion;
(d) generating a PruningCertificate comprising a NegativeProofHash; and
(e) suppressing execution enablement in a fail-closed manner when pruning is applied non-deterministically.
2. The method of claim 1 wherein PruningPolicy comprises weight threshold, inactivity duration, or relative delta criteria.
3. The method of claim 1 wherein NegativeProofHash is computed over canonical concatenation of branch identifier and pruning criteria.
4. The method of claim 1 wherein PRUNED branches remain preserved in the genealogical structure.
5. The method of claim 1 wherein pruning decisions are reproducible across distributed nodes operating over identical artefact sets.
6. A distributed computing system configured to perform the method of any preceding claim.
7. A non-transitory computer-readable medium storing instructions which, when executed, perform the method of any of claims 1–5.
Abstract
A deterministic branch pruning and collapse mechanism is disclosed for distributed arbitration systems operating under an Architected Instruction & Evidence Protocol (AIEP). Branches are evaluated against a schema-defined pruning policy and eligible branches transition to a PRUNED state without destructive deletion. A PruningCertificate comprising a NegativeProofHash is generated to certify pruning decisions. Execution enablement is suppressed in a fail-closed manner upon non-deterministic pruning. The invention reduces state growth while preserving genealogical integrity and replay-certifiable determinism.
Brief Description of the Drawing
FIG. 1 — Branch Structure and Pruning
┌──────────────┐
│ Root State │
│ (canonical) │
└──────┬───────┘
┌───────────┼───────────┐
┌──────▼──────┐ │ ┌───────▼─────┐
│ Branch B1 │ │ │ Branch B2 │
│ viable │ │ │ stale → │
└──────┬──────┘ │ │ PRUNE │
│ │ └─────────────┘
┌──────▼──────┐ │
│ Branch B1a │ │ ┌─────────────┐
│ (deepened) │ └───▶│ Branch B3 │
└─────────────┘ │ candidate │
└──────┬──────┘
│
┌────────▼────────┐
│ Selected Path │
│ hash-committed │
└─────────────────┘