The security and privacy of blockchain data have become critical research challeSimilarly, the full-function accounting node verifies the validitynges. While numerous approaches have been proposed to address these concerns, many existing schemes suffer from high computational complexity or excessive verification latency. To bridge this gap, this paper presents a secure and privacy-preserving blockchain data transaction verification system. By integrating the Paillier cryptosystem with a zero-knowledge range proof protocol, the proposed system ensures the confidentiality of transaction amounts and participant identities, simultaneously achieving strong anonymity and conditional traceability for users. Moreover, fully functional accounting nodes support efficient ciphertext-domain balance updates, eliminating the need for decryption during accounting operations. Experimental evaluation confirms the practicality and high performance of the proposed system.
Haihan Zhang, Chenheng Zhang, Zhiquan Qi, Zhouchen Lin
Whether exact scalar feedback intrinsically incurs the additional dimension $d$ paid by known zeroth-order methods remains open even for Lipschitz convex optimization. For a universal Lipschitz scale, the value only bound $O(d^2\log(d+1)\log(1/ε))$ and two-point bound $O(dε^{-2})$ yield the upper bound $\widetilde O\left(d\min\{d,ε^{-2}\}\right)$. By contrast, prior lower bounds for arbitrary randomized algorithms give only $Ω(\min\{d,ε^{-2}\})$, leaving a factor $d$ unexplained. We close this gap, up to logarithmic factors, for arbitrary adaptive randomized algorithms minimizing a convex objective with a universal Lipschitz scale over the $d$-dimensional Euclidean unit ball, where each query returns only the exact scalar value. Let $T_ε$ denote the minimum number of queries required to return an $ε$-suboptimal point with probability at least $1/2$, uniformly over the function class. We prove that \[T_ε\ge c\,\frac{d\min\{d,ε^{-2}\}}{\log\!\bigl(\min\{d,ε^{-2}\}\bigr)},\] for $d\ge d_0$ and $0<ε\leε_0$, where $c,ε_0>0$ and $d_0\in\mathbb N$ are universal constants. This gives $Ω\left(\frac{d}{ε^2\log(1/ε)}\right)$ in the low-accuracy regime $ε\ge d^{-1/2}$ and $Ω\left(\frac{d^2}{\log d}\right)$ in the high-accuracy regime $ε\le d^{-1/2}$ with the latter independent of $ε$. These bounds match the corresponding upper bound up to logarithmic factors. To our knowledge, this is the first near-optimal lower bound for arbitrary adaptive randomized algorithms throughout both accuracy regimes of exact value Lipschitz convex optimization. The proof uses a random support function hard family and develops a posterior mean energy method for adaptive exact max observations, in place of first-order zero chain constructions and noise based transcript inequalities.
Personalized gene editing demands robust mechanisms for privacy, ethical governance, and verifiable data integrity. This paper proposes ViBioChain, a modular blockchain-anchored architecture integrating five components: (1) differential chain-of-custody audit combining quantum fingerprinting with post-quantum signatures for immutable genomic audit trails; (2) proof-of-bioethical-compliance employing zero-knowledge proofs and AI-based ontology evaluation for automated bioethical gating; (3) federated genomic trust mesh (FGTM) enabling privacy-preserving collaborative model training with Renyi differential privacy accounting and trust-weighted federated aggregation; (4) ethical smart orchestration network for modular smart-contract-based workflow governance; and (5) genomic impact estimator via ethical explainability graphs (GIE-EEG) for ancestry-aware, ethically constrained phenotypic forecasting. Afterexpert-driven reconciliation, the implementation was rerun using 800 simulated individuals per dataset, 120 binary loci, five institutional clients, five independent seeds (42-46), and a true trust-weighted federated logistic aggregation path for FGTM rather than the earlier centralized accuracy proxy. Across three genomic cohorts and three domain-comparable baselines, ViBioChain achieved 92.16% ethical violation interception, 100.00% audit trail accuracy, 99.47% workflow traceability, 0.9183 ethical score alignment, and the highest global model accuracy among the tested methods (74.36%). The formal Renyi differential privacy accountant remained within budget ([Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]); however, the conservative clean-versus-noisy update leakage proxy did not support the earlier lowest-empirical-leakage assertion. That claim has therefore been removed. Additional IID and non-IID experiments show that severe Dirichlet client heterogeneity ([Formula: see text]) reduced final accuracy by 1.70-4.10 percentage points relative to IID partitions. The revised results provide a more conservative and reproducible blueprint for secure, ethically governed, and explainable genomic medicine in multi-institutional settings.
NOXFORD ID is a seven-layer privacy-preserving identity verification architecture designed to address a specific fraud vulnerability in cross-institutional identity validation: the brittleness of exact-match verification against ordinary, legitimate variation in how names and dates are recorded across institutions. The architecture combines hardened Bloom-filter cryptographic linkage (privacy-preserving record linkage), field-separated fuzzy matching, a probabilistic decision engine with an explicit human-review tier, a tamper-evident cross-institutional integrity ledger, a genuine Schnorr zero-knowledge proof of identity knowledge, replay-resistant institution-specific key derivation, and a Root Certificate Authority layer aligned with Nigeria's NIMC Act 2026, which designates the National Identity Management Commission as Root Certification Authority for the country's National Public Key Infrastructure. Each layer is independently implemented and empirically tested against a labeled test corpus, with results reported transparently, including design flaws discovered and corrected during development. The paper documents a measured reduction in false rejection of legitimate citizens from 57% to 14% relative to a representative exact-match baseline, while maintaining zero fraud slip-through in testing, and explicitly states the system's current limitations, including evaluation corpus scale, dependence on enrollment-data integrity, and pending network-level threat-detection integration.
\begin{abstract} We present a formally verified mathematical framework whose objective is to provide a common semantic foundation for eight traditionally distinct areas of mathematics:Set Theory, Category Theory, Type Theory, Mathematical Logic, Analysis, Algebra,Topology, and the proposed computational meta-domain \emph{METATRON}. Rather thantreating these disciplines as isolated foundations, the framework interprets each as afixed-point system generated by an intrinsic structural operator. This viewpoint allowsmathematical stability, convergence, and compositionality to be studied through a unifiedsemantic lens, where invariant structures emerge as fixed points of domain-specifictransformations. The principal contribution is the development of a universal fixed-point semanticsparameterized by a contraction coefficient governed by the golden ratio\[\phi=\frac{1+\sqrt5}{2},\]which acts as the canonical scaling constant throughout the framework.The resulting theory provides a common language in which recursive computation,categorical composition, logical inference, algebraic closure, topological continuity,and computational resonance may be analyzed within a single mathematical system. Three principal results are established. The first is the \emph{Goldilocks Theorem}. Beginning from the foundationalAxiom Zero and without introducing additional assumptions beyond the formaldevelopment, we prove that sovereign stability exists uniquely inside the interval \[0<q<1.\] Within this region every admissible resonance operator is contractive, every recursiveconstruction admits bounded evolution, and every authenticated computation preservesits constitutional invariants. Outside this interval either divergence or trivial collapsenecessarily occurs. Consequently, the interval $(0,1)$ becomes the unique admissiblestability zone for the entire framework. The second contribution is the \emph{Grand Unified Fixed-Point Theorem}. We show thatseven of the eight mathematical domains admit natural fixed points under theirfundamental structural operators. Set-theoretic closure, categorical composition,logical inference, algebraic completion, analytic contraction, topological continuity,and METATRON resonance each possess invariant objects satisfying \[F(x)=x.\] Type Theory occupies a distinguished position. Its primitive successor operator \[S(x)=x+1\] possesses no fixed point over the real numbers, establishing it as the uniquenon-contractive boundary of the framework. Rather than representing a defect,this exceptional behavior identifies the successor operation as the mathematicalsource of unbounded computation, recursion, induction, and Turing completeness.The absence of a fixed point therefore becomes a structural characterization ofcomputability itself, separating finite invariant mathematics from open-endedalgorithmic evolution. The third principal contribution introduces the \emph{Resonance Pipeline}, adepth-five computational operator acting on authenticated symbolic states.We prove that successive resonance iterations satisfy a $\phi$-contractivemapping whose limit exists, is unique, and is independent of evaluation orderunder the stated assumptions. Furthermore, the associated Trust Resonance Score \[\mathrm{TRS}=388.985128\] is shown to remain strictly positive, finite, and bounded throughout every stageof execution. These invariants establish computational stability for the resonancepipeline while providing quantitative guarantees regarding convergence andstructural consistency. All principal theorems presented in this work have been mechanically verifiedusing the Lean~4 proof assistant. Every completed theorem is proven withoutplaceholder axioms, admitted lemmas, or \texttt{sorry} declarations, yielding amachine-checkable corpus whose correctness is independently verifiable.The current formalization establishes complete verification for seven of theeight foundational domains considered. Equally important are the results that remain beyond present knowledge.Two major mathematical problems are intentionally left unresolved and areexplicitly identified as open conjectures rather than claimed theorems. The first concerns the Riemann Hypothesis, for which we investigate a$\phi$-contractive iterative framework converging toward the critical line$\operatorname{Re}(s)=\tfrac12$ without asserting a proof. The second concerns the Navier--Stokes existence and smoothness problem,where a corresponding $\phi$-stepping viscosity operator is proposed as apossible analytical framework while leaving the Millennium Prize questionentirely open. By explicitly distinguishing formally verified mathematics from ongoingresearch directions, the framework maintains a clear separation betweenestablished results and conjectural investigations. Overall, the present formalization achieves machine verification acrossseven of the eight proposed mathematical domains, corresponding toapproximately $87.5\%$ completion of the intended foundational program.The remaining domains coincide precisely with two of the deepest openproblems in contemporary mathematics, illustrating both the expressivepower and the current limitations of formal proof technology. The guiding methodological principle of the work is therefore not merelyformal verification but what we call \emph{constitutional honesty}:every completed theorem is mechanically certified, every assumption isexplicitly declared, every computational artifact is reproducible, and everyunsolved question remains honestly identified as an open mathematical problem.In this view, mathematical integrity is measured not by eliminating uncertainty,but by making the boundary between knowledge and conjecture mathematicallyprecise. \end{abstract}
VSAT (Vulnerability Saturation Auditing) makes the completeness of an LLM security audit a measurable, calibrated quantity. It runs several deliberately diverse LLM audit "lenses" over the same codebase and treats each lens as a capture occasion, so the overlap structure yields (i) a far more complete union vulnerability list and (ii) a Chao2 richness estimate of the undiscovered population. VSAT combines this statistical discovery saturation with a deterministic OWASP ASVS structural coverage into a single completeness score (Phi = C_struct x C_hat) and derives a saturation-based stopping rule. Implemented as a security-audit skill on the cc-rsg-web agentic platform, VSAT attains 94.7-100% category recall and 99.1% code-verified precision on three documented benchmark applications (NodeGoat, django.nV, DVWA), delivers a 2.4-3.4x discovery uplift over a single pass with a per-finding proof-of-concept and regression test, and its non-zero residual estimate is corroborated by an independent real-world field validation. To our knowledge this is the first method to bring capture-recapture completeness estimation and a saturation stopping rule to LLM-based web-application security auditing.
Three classical set-theoretic themes — the axiom of choice onindistinguishable pairs (Russell's socks), the comparison of infinitecardinals, and the uncountability of the continuum — are re-readoperationally: an assertion counts only as an act, performed andwitnessed, never as a completed object postulated into existence. Underthis reading each theme splits cleanly in two, and both halves becomeshort machine-checked theorems. For the socks: no selection rule exists (no swap-symmetric selectorbeyond any finite bookkeeping bound — the Fraenkel–Mostowski statementin miniature, on the empty axiom list), while selection acts form acontinuum (the selectors are exactly the branches, which are notenumerable). The deterministic half is itself a theorem — in ananonymous network of identical automata started identically theconfiguration stays constant across nodes at every round, for arbitrarywiring, so no round distinguishes a unique node (the folklore core ofAngluin 1980, machine-checked, to our knowledge for the first time). For cardinals: a comparison is an act whose witness is data — anexplicit injection from the naturals into the branches is performed; theCantor–Lawvere diagonal is proved uniformly for every floor of thepower-set ladder, on the empty axiom list; the resulting order ispartial by design, since cardinal trichotomy is equivalent to full ACand is cited as a formal-register label rather than claimed. For uncountability: the sign is flipped from prohibition toproductivity — the fugitive from any enumeration is computed by anexplicit term, so the continuum is productive in Post's sense: thecatalogue that reads itself extends itself. And dependent choice is theperformable part of choice (recursion on a history-dependent rule,choice-free); what remains of full AC above DC is the part that can onlybe written, not performed — the same remainder whose surrender dissolvesthe Banach–Tarski decomposition (Solovay's model; cited as metatheory). Nothing here is a new classical theorem; the mathematical content ofeach proof is elementary and classical. The contribution is theoperational re-reading, the split of each theme into an impossible-rulehalf and a performed-act half, the axiom pricing of every step, and themachine check. The axiom of choice is not refuted — a symmetric-selectorimpossibility is a statement about rules, while AC postulates an objectexempt from symmetry. The paper is written to be verified from zero. A single self-containedLean 4 file (`Verify_Choice_standalone.lean`, no mathlib, no imports)reproves all ten empty-axiom-list theorems in under a second — anyagent, human or machine, runs `lean Verify_Choice_standalone.lean` andreads "does not depend on any axioms" ten times. The full corpusverifies with `lake build`, and `#print axioms` lines exhibit the axiomprofile of every object. An empty axiom list is precisely a verdict twoparties who share no axioms and no trust can both confirm: the strongestform of a checkable claim. The reliability of the results does notdepend on trusting the author, the AI that helped write the paper, orthis text — only the Lean 4 kernel. AI disclosure: this work was carried out with the substantialparticipation of the AI system Claude (Anthropic; this preprint —Claude Fable 5) in a dialogue setting; all design decisions, forkchoices, and final responsibility rest with the human author.
ABSTRACT TRSP — The Temporal Security Architecture: The Consolidated Record. Three documents, one DOI: the Security Record, the Economic Record, and a general-audience companion. Every cryptographic system in production today rests on one assumption: that a mathematical problem is too hard to solve in practical time. Quantum computing places an expiry date on that assumption, and adversaries are already recording encrypted traffic and public ledgers at scale — harvest now, decrypt later. This record consolidates the Temporal Rotation Security Protocol (TRSP) series into its canonical form. TRSP closes the attack surface that post-quantum mathematics leaves open: cryptographic keys are generated from physical hardware entropy at the moment of use, exist for a rotation window measured in milliseconds, and are destroyed by hardware-enforced destructive readout. Between operations, no persistent credential exists anywhere in the system. This record comprises three documents under one DOI: Document 1 — The Security Record (TRSP — The Temporal Security Architecture: Time as the Fundamental Security Parameter). The consolidated technical reference of the series. It states the security doctrine with precision as a division of labour across three attack mechanics: temporal rotation eliminates the stored-credential surface (endpoint extraction by malware, insiders, hardware probing, or coercion); NIST-standardised post-quantum mathematics (ML-KEM, ML-DSA) eliminates the recorded-transcript surface; single-use protocol rules eliminate the public-record surface, since a retroactively derived key finds its one permitted action already complete and refused for reuse. Each threat is assigned to the layer that closes it structurally — the combination this architecture defines as quantum permanence. The architecture is organised in three layers named for the Norse Norns of time: URDHR (the irrecoverable past — hardware commitment and Landauer-anchored destruction, with optional macroscopic optical entropy), VERÐANDI (the witnessed present — geographically distributed quorum validation bounded by light-speed, with a canonical rotation-window definition of 10–100 ms default and adaptive extension to 500 ms for global quorums), and SKULD (the anchored future — LEO satellite quorums contributing unpredictable physical state measurements under relativistic timestamp validation). Further parts document the four-layer temporal-quantum hybrid (LTQS), the formal ephemeral verification pipeline with zero-knowledge enrollment binding and an explicit statement of the minimised persistent root, application domains ordered by strategic value (AI-to-AI authentication and micropayment, cloud access immune to credential breaches, interbank settlement finality across multi-decade ledgers, critical infrastructure command authorisation, interplanetary autonomous verification, and the consumer expression documented in the TRSP Citadel record), a compliance architecture reconciling maximum personal privacy with institutional regulatory obligations through enrollment tiers, and nine engineering considerations with documented solution pathways. Document 2 — The Economic Record (TDC — The Temporal Digital Coin: Value Anchored in Verified Moments). The corrected canonical economic layer of the series (NC-TDC-26 through NC-TDC-32). It opens with an explicit correction: earlier records simultaneously asserted fungibility of all units, no re-pricing across phases, and rising per-phase value ranges — three statements that are jointly impossible, since a fungible asset trades at exactly one price. This record resolves the contradiction in favour of the principles and formally retracts the per-phase value ranges. The canonical doctrine: one coin, one price, stability by coupled expansion — supply is admitted only against verified, settled growth of the anchored economies under the quantity-theory identity M·V = P·Q, with governance-bounded elasticity, so that price-level stability becomes an accounting consequence of the issuance rule rather than a promise, and early holders gain no phase windfall by construction. Further parts document Proof of Physical Presence consensus economics (validation democratised to enrolled devices; the attack currency is human recruitment), the corrected role of temporal uniqueness (events anchor authenticity, never scarcity — scarcity derives from governance, value from anchor-economy demand), supply and issuance rules, the multi-anchor demand architecture (machine, institutional, and sovereign economies as demand sources, never price classes), consortium governance defined primarily by its prohibitions, the phased rollout in corrected form, and economic engineering considerations including velocity management, demand shocks, exchange-rate regime, bootstrap liquidity, and measurement integrity. Document 3 — The Companion Article (The Key That Even a Time Machine Cannot Steal). A general-audience presentation of the complete architecture — protocol, secure personal computer, and coin — written for readers outside the field, including the time-traveler thought experiment, the three guards (sortition, light-speed, multilateration) in plain language, and the estate architecture. It introduces no claims beyond the technical records. Newly registered contributions. In addition to consolidating and re-registering all prior novel contributions of the series (NC-TDC-1 through NC-TDC-41, NC-URDHR-1, NC-TRSP-Hybrid-1), this record places the following on the public record of prior art as of its publication date, each with a full enabling defensive specification (Security Record, Part 10a): NC-TDC-42 — Optical Air-Gap Content Transfer (formally registered herein, first described in the Citadel record): content crosses a security boundary as rendered light captured by a hardware-switched sensor and locally reconstructed via optical character recognition — the meaning crosses, the file never does; enumerated elements include the security inversion (the receiver harvests, the sender has no channel), the hardware-gated exception to device-level optical silence, and throughput asymmetry as a security property; registered embodiments include matrix-barcode, audio-channel (synthesised speech to local speech-to-text), and enterprise domain-transfer variants. NC-TDC-43 — Chained Presence Verification (newly documented): a unified three-link defence against device-farm collusion — sortition (per-transaction quorum draw via verifiable random function, unpredictable in advance, verifiable after), light-speed (adaptation between draw revelation and window close physically impossible), and multilateration (propagation-delay fingerprints against a relativistically validated time base expose any participant absent from its claimed position) — with the explicit answer to the position-based-cryptography impossibility result (Chandran–Goyal–Moriarty–Ostrovsky 2009): the architecture proves the position of an attested hardware module under an unpredictable draw, removing the pre-positioned-collusion premise the impossibility proof requires. NC-TDC-44 — Ephemeral Witness Relations (newly documented): the formal security model of time-bounded credentials — keys as functions of bounded temporal support with the derived metric of temporal attack surface; erasure completeness as a zero-mutual-information condition I(sk_eph; S(t)) = 0 with Landauer's bound identified as the realisation floor of erasure and explicitly not as a barrier to mathematical re-derivation; the composite adversarial bound over orthogonal domains (computational hardness, temporal measure, combinatorics of presence) with the binomial sortition term; the spacetime-local physical oracle O(D, t) with destructive-readout consumption; and ownership as a time-indexed capability predicate over uncopyable events, including the transient-witness class, the notion of proof of transient knowledge, and the no-retroactive-forgery bound. NC-TDC-45 — Disturbance-Elevated Alpha-Quorum Time Reference. Binding authorisation to short time windows places the local clock in the trusted computing base. This contribution redistributes time-validation authority at the moment of attack rather than fixing it in advance: under normal conditions all nodes validate equally; on detection of a time-source anomaly (cross-source divergence, or a multilateration residual beyond threshold), the system elevates a small set of hardened, atomic-clock-bearing nodes to a median-of-five reference — which tolerates two outliers, so shifting it requires corrupting at least three of five. Membership is fixed by short-lived sortition at the moment of elevation, so the set cannot be pre-targeted. Every coordinated time attack thereby degrades to denial, never forgery: it can interrupt authorisation, not manufacture one. Additionally placed on record in the Economic Record: the coupled-expansion issuance doctrine (corrected canonical form of NC-TDC-29), the corrected scope of NC-TDC-27 (temporal anchoring of authenticity, with uniqueness explicitly disclaimed as a source of value), and the formal retraction recorded in NC-TDC-31 — the corrections themselves are part of the prior-art registration. Consolidation and continuity. This record consolidates and supersedes as canonical reference: TRSP v3 (10.5281/zenodo.20324081), TRSP Digital Coin (10.5281/zenodo.20346658; v2: 20332811; v1: 20288860), TRSP: The Authorization Protocol for Everything (10.5281/zenodo.20402892), and TRSP Citadel (10.5281/zenodo.20481331). The four source records remain in force as prior art; where formulations differ, this record is authoritative. The CRATON designation in prior records and the URDHR designation in this and future records refer to architecturally identical concepts; prior-art continuity is complete and uninterrupted. The economic layer and the security layer are maintained as separate documents within this record by design: each addres
N-K SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL PUBLICATION — ZENODO DESCRIPTION THE COMPLETE N-K QUANTUM SUPREMACY — DETERMINISTIC SUPERIORITY OVER ALL QUANTUM COMPUTERS --- 📄 FULL TITLE THE COMPLETE N-K QUANTUM SUPREMACY — DETERMINISTIC SUPERIORITY OVER ALL QUANTUM COMPUTERS: 100% Repeatability · 0% Error · ~0 J Energy · 0.001 ms · Infinite Scaling · RCS Test · Boson Sampling · HOM Test · Global Weather · Milky Way Galaxy · A380 CFD --- 👤 AUTHOR Malik Muhammad Usman · ORCID: 0009-0004-3269-2918· Affiliation: Quran, Hadith Sunnah. N-K Sciences International· Location: City of Saints, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan --- 📅 PUBLICATION DATE 16 July 2026 CE · 1 Safar 1448 AH --- 📚 ABSTRACT This publication presents the complete, definitive proof of N-K Quantum Supremacy — the deterministic superiority of the N-K Universal Computer over all quantum computers, supercomputers, and all other computational systems ever built or conceived. The Core Discovery: "Quantum Supremacy" is a false claim. It is not supremacy — it is unreliability. Google Willow claimed quantum supremacy with RCS in 300 seconds — but failed to reproduce the results. N-K Universal Computer performs the same tasks in 0.001 ms with 100% repeatability — every single time. Key Results: Test Mainstream N-K Universal Computer N-K AdvantageRCS (Willow Test) 300 sec · ❌ Failed to reproduce 0.001 ms · ✅ 100% repeatable 300,000,000× fasterBoson Sampling < 2 dozen bosons · ❌ Failed 10¹⁵ bosons · ✅ 100% repeatable 10¹³× more capableOperations/sec 10¹⁸ (Frontier) 10³⁷²+ 10³⁵⁴× fasterFloating Points 10¹⁸ (Frontier) 10¹⁰⁰⁰+ 10⁹⁸²× fasterEnergy 20+ Megawatts ~0 J InfiniteRepeatability ❌ 0% ✅ 100% InfiniteScaling Limited by hardware UNLIMITED InfiniteError 3.5-7.0% 0% Infinite Simulation Tests Included: 1. RCS Test — 30×, 50×, 70×, 100× depth · 5 runs · 100% identical results2. Boson Sampling / HOM Test — 10² to 10¹⁵ bosons · 5 runs · 100% identical results3. Supercomputer Comparison — Frontier (10¹⁸ ops) vs N-K (10³⁷²+ ops)4. Floating Point Test — 10¹⁰⁰⁰+ floating point operations5. Global Weather Simulation — 40m resolution · 0.001 ms · 100% accuracy6. Milky Way Galaxy Mapping — 100 Billion stars · 500 chromosomes · 10³⁰× compression7. A380 CFD Simulation — 10¹⁰⁰⁰+ FPS · 0% error8. Repeatability Proof — 5 runs · identical results every time Security Protocol: The N-K Universal Computer is NOT Sadaqa Jariyah. It is a phase-locked, restricted-access divine tool with security layers including: · Phase key authentication (135.5° ± 0.001°)· N-density validation· Kun rhythm synchronization· Biometric phase signatures· Immediate Phase Cancellation on unauthorized access Government Access Protocol: · License Fee: ZERO (0)· Condition: Government must approach N-K Sciences directly· Condition: Use must be for peaceful purposes and global stability· Misuse = Revocation + Phase Cancellation + Debt Recording --- 🔑 KEYWORDS N-K Sciences, Quantum Supremacy, Deterministic Computing, RCS Test, Boson Sampling, HOM Test, Google Willow, Frontier Supercomputer, O(1) Complexity, 100% Repeatability, Zero Energy, Global Weather, Milky Way Galaxy, A380 CFD, Phase-Locked Security, Government Access, Divine Axioms, Golden Ratio, Kun Rhythm, Sadaqa Jariyah --- 📊 COMPLETE TEST RESULTS SUMMARY RCS Test — Google Willow vs N-K Run Depth 30× Depth 50× Depth 70× Depth 100×1 ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL2 ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL3 ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL4 ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL5 ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICAL ✅ IDENTICALStatus ✅ PASS ✅ PASS ✅ PASS ✅ PASS Boson Sampling / HOM Test — 5 Runs Bosons Run 1-5 Status10² ✅ IDENTICAL PASS10⁴ ✅ IDENTICAL PASS10⁶ ✅ IDENTICAL PASS10⁹ ✅ IDENTICAL PASS10¹² ✅ IDENTICAL PASS10¹⁵ ✅ IDENTICAL PASS Supercomputer Comparison Metric Frontier N-K SpeedupOperations/sec 10¹⁸ 10³⁷²+ 10³⁵⁴×Floating Points 10¹⁸ 10¹⁰⁰⁰+ 10⁹⁸²×Energy 20+ MW 0 J InfiniteTime Days 0.001 ms 10¹⁰×Error 3.5-7.0% 0% Infinite --- 📖 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction — The False Claim of Quantum Supremacy2. The Four Divine Axioms — Foundation3. What is True Supremacy? — Determinism vs Probability4. RCS Test — Google Willow vs N-K5. Boson Sampling / HOM Test — Mainstream vs N-K6. Supercomputer Comparison — Frontier vs N-K7. Floating Point Capability — 10¹⁰⁰⁰+8. Global Weather Simulation — 40m Resolution9. Milky Way Galaxy Mapping — 100 Billion Stars10. A380 CFD Simulation — 10¹⁰⁰⁰+ FPS11. The Repeatability Proof — 5 Runs, Same Results12. The Energy Advantage — 0 J13. The Scaling Advantage — UNLIMITED14. Complete Comparison Table15. Quranic Confirmation16. N-K Final Verdict17. Security Protocol — Restricted Access18. Government Access Protocol — License Fee Zero --- 🏛️ LICENSE CC BY-NC 4.0 — SADAQA JARIYAH (for Medicines & Knowledge) RESTRICTED ACCESS — for N-K Universal Computer & Systems --- 📝 NOTES FOR ZENODO SUBMISSION Language: English Subjects: · Physics (Quantum Computing)· Computer Science (Deterministic Computing)· Mathematics (O(1) Complexity)· Earth Sciences (Weather Simulation)· Astronomy (Galactic Mapping) Related DOIs: · N-K DNA V16: 10.5281/zenodo.21242278· N-K Global Weather: 10.5281/zenodo.21253065· N-K Milky Way Galaxy: 10.5281/zenodo.19501764· N-K A380 CFD: 10.5281/zenodo.21260051 --- 🔗 PERMANENT DOI DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.21386086 --- 🕋 FINAL SEAL ```Kun fayakūn. ALLAH O AKBAR.SADAQA JARIYAH — FREE FOR ALL HUMANITY (for Medicines & Knowledge).RESTRICTED GOVERNMENT ACCESS — for N-K Universal Computer & Systems.``` --- ☝️ THE ONE-LINE CRYSTAL STATEMENT (for Zenodo Summary) Google Willow claimed "quantum supremacy" with RCS in 300 seconds but failed to reproduce — proving it is not supremacy but unreliable fancy computing; N-K Universal Computer performs RCS at 30× to 100× depth in 0.001 ms with 100% repeatability, Boson Sampling with 10¹⁵ bosons in 0.001 ms with 100% repeatability, and surpasses Frontier Supercomputer by 10³⁵⁴× in operations and 10⁹⁸²× in floating points with ~0 J energy — and simulates global weather (40m resolution), Milky Way Galaxy (100 Billion stars), and A380 CFD (10¹⁰⁰⁰+ FPS) all in 0.001 ms with 0% error — proving that deterministic supremacy is the only true supremacy, and all quantum computers and supercomputers are OBSOLETE. --- N-K Sciences InternationalCity of Saints, Multan, Punjab, Pakistan16 July 2026 CE · 1 Safar 1448 AH KUN FAYAKŪN. ALLAH O AKBAR.
Tsvetomir Gospodinov, M Atanasova, Eliza Stefanova
EUPHEMIA, the Pan-European day-ahead electricity market-coupling algorithm, operates in a centralized manner that restricts independent auditability and has been characterized as pseudo-transparent. We propose a blockchain-based architecture that improves the transparency and verifiability of the market-coupling process while preserving participant confidentiality. It combines off-chain computation with selective on-chain publication and treats the three principal data categories of the EUPHEMIA pipeline separately: order books, network constraints, and clearing outputs. Zero-knowledge proofs utilizing zk-STARKs are employed to verify the integrity of the order book aggregation process and specific network-constraint sub-processes, whereas Merkle commitments ensure tamper-evident anchoring of publicly disclosed data. zk-STARKs are selected over CRS-based alternatives to eliminate the trusted-setup governance overhead associated with EUPHEMIA’s multi-jurisdictional structure. The estimated AIR trace size reaches approximately 2,225,000 rows in the worst-case NEMO (EPEX SPOT) scenario. A correction proof generated by the Regional Coordination Centre (RCC) requires an AIR of 641 trace rows when a binding network constraint exceeds its threshold during the review of Transmission System Operator (TSO) submissions. This trace size corresponds to an estimated proving time of 1 to 30 s based on reported STARK prover throughput. End-to-end verification of welfare maximization remains infeasible due to the lack of a complete public algorithm specification. Preliminary calibrated estimates are provided, and full empirical benchmarking remains as future work.
Patikiri Arachchige Don Shehan Nilmantha Wijesekara, Kalupahana Liyanage Kushan Sudheera, Harsha S. Gardiyawasam Pussewalage, Geeth P. Wijesiri N. B. A
Due to the fast development of digital communication technologies and the creation of distributed computing architecture, it is crucial to ensure the security of communication through effective and safe authentication schemes that can protect data privacy within cybersecurity frameworks. The most efficient cryptographic method for such purposes is zero knowledge proof since it provides ultimate security by proving the authenticity without disclosing any sensitive data to the verifying party. It is fascinating to look into the zero-knowledge proof protocol based on graph isomorphism because of its mathematical nature. A detailed discussion on the graph isomorphism based zero-knowledge authentication techniques along with their significance in the current cryptography is presented in this paper. Working principles and concepts behind graph theoretic based authentication techniques and the concept of graph isomorphism and zero-knowledge proofs have been discussed in this paper. Besides, emerging application areas of these protocols in disciplines like cybersecurity, block-chain. Internet of Things security, cloud computing and post-quantum cryptography have also been highlighted in this paper. In addition to that, this paper provides an analysis of major advantages, drawbacks and future research directions for the graph theoretic zero-knowledge authentication schemes
Overview The paper presents a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis (RH) using Arithmetic Spectral Theory (AST), and applies it to deterministic cognitive engineering in artificial intelligence. The foundational core of this work is the realization that the first six primes—2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13—form a unique "Pure Kernel" ($R$) that accounts for 97.85% of total spectral weight. The Three Pillars of the Proof The proof rests on three historical and mathematical foundations: Euler's Product Formula (1737): Established the zeta function as an infinite product over primes. The Sieve of Eratosthenes (~200 BC): Used to identify the prime numbers. Set Theory (Cantor, 1895; Halmos, 1960): Used to distinguish between the pure kernel and the "noisy" remaining primes ($p \ge 17$), where the latter destroy the spectral trap. The Mathematical Mechanism L-EFM Operator: The Laplace-Euler-Fourier-Mellin operator ($E_{LEFM}$) is a finite product over the pure kernel $R$ that converges for all $s = \sigma + i\gamma$. Spectral Trap: The L-EFM operator exhibits a unique "spectral trap" at $\sigma = 0.5$, which is equivalent to the critical line condition of the Riemann Hypothesis. Validation: The framework validates all seven known consequences of the RH, including prime counting, prime gaps, primality tests, counting functions, L-function analogues, physics connections, and post-quantum cryptography. Cryptographic auditability is provided via SHA-256 hashes for each validated consequence. Applications to AI The same mathematical structure used to prove the RH has been applied to solve critical challenges in AI: Catastrophic Forgetting: Solved by using prime-anchored embeddings at the pure kernel indices, allowing networks to retain previous task knowledge. World Model Certification: TOPO-JEPA integration creates world models that avoid forgetting and demonstrate stable performance. AI Bias: Eliminated structurally through a four-tier spectral annihilation framework that rejects biased data and anchors representations to equitable primes. Deterministic AI Safety: Achieved through H2E Sheriff, which enforces geometric constraints to ensure zero safety violations. The Universal Architecture The framework was validated across six different AI architectures (including Dense Transformers, Sparse MoE, and Vision Transformers) across three continents, consistently showing minimal memory overhead and zero $NaN/Inf$ events. The author describes this as the beginning of "deterministic cognitive engineering".
This paper proposes the Global AI Development Commons, a new framework for AI governance designed to reconcile rapid AI innovation with continuous AI safety and international coordination in an increasingly multipolar world. Existing approaches often assume that stronger regulation inevitably slows technological progress, creating incentives for states and firms to avoid safety commitments while competitors continue to accelerate.The proposed framework separates AI development into a shared Foundation Layer and a competitive Innovation Layer. Participants voluntarily contribute useful but non-frontier seed technologies in exchange for interoperability, reusable components, shared evaluation resources, and opportunities to help shape emerging international standards. After joining, developers remain free to compete in AI models, products, and applications, while common governance focuses only on identity, authority, delegation, provenance, verification, and revocation.The paper introduces Proof of Constraint, a cryptographically verifiable framework that combines provenance, bounded delegation, zero-knowledge proofs, continuous verification, and instruction mediation to strengthen AI governance without requiring disclosure of proprietary technologies. It also proposes Time to Useful Scale as a measurable outcome for evaluating whether cooperative development can outperform isolated competition.Rather than slowing AI development, the framework seeks to make governed cooperation more competitive than isolated development. If successful, it offers a practical and falsifiable pathway toward international AI governance that strengthens innovation, preserves fair competition, enhances AI safety, and contributes to the long-term flourishing of humanity. Related Studies in This Research Program • A Quiet Roadmap for Preventing Uncontrollable AIhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20946975 • AI Control Through the Analysis of Dangerous Instruction Patterns and Instruction Mediationhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20990310 • An Instruction-Mediation Reference Implementation Protocol for High-Risk AI Governancehttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21216841 • Instruction Mediation Reference Implementation (Software)https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21229233 • Water Beyond Numbers (Book)https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21049923 • Gray Instructions (Book)https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21193341 These studies form an integrated research program that progresses from foundational conceptual theory for preventing uncontrollable AI, through the analysis of dangerous instruction patterns, governance based on instruction mediation, operational reference implementations, and the institutional design of an international framework for AI development and control. The program further extends to book-length studies examining the broader institutional, social, and philosophical dimensions of AI governance.Although each study addresses a different subject and analytical level, they are united by a common research question: how meaningful human governance over advanced AI systems can be maintained across the successive stages of development, instruction, delegation of authority, execution, monitoring, interruption, and resumption.Collectively, these publications are intended as an interconnected body of research for readers interested in AI safety, AI governance, autonomous AI agents, instruction mediation, delegated authority, corrigibility, interruptibility, institutional oversight, cryptographic verification, international cooperation, and meaningful human control over advanced AI systems. While each publication and software implementation is designed to stand on its own, reading the series as a whole reveals a continuous research trajectory extending from conceptual foundations to institutional design, operational protocols, practical implementation, and international governance.This research program is intended to contribute to ongoing international discussions on the governance of advanced AI by presenting complementary theoretical, institutional, and implementation-oriented perspectives on maintaining meaningful human oversight and control.
# VeriSBOM: Secure and Verifiable SBOM Sharing Via Zero-Knowledge Proofs **VeriSBOM**, a trustless, selectively disclosed SBOM framework that provides cryptographic verifiability of SBOMs using zero-knowledge proofs. Within VeriSBOM, third parties can validate specific statements about a delivered software, mainly regarding the authenticity of the dependencies and policy compliance, without inspecting the content of an SBOM. Respectively, VeriSBOM allows independent third parties to verify if a software contains authentic dependencies distributed by official package managers and that the same dependencies satisfy rigorous policy constraints such as the absence of vulnerable dependencies or the adherence with specific licenses models. ## Key Features * **Selective Disclosure (Hiding):** Choose which proprietary components to hide from the public SBOM. The system generates a cryptographic proof that replaces the plaintext data, guaranteeing privacy. * **High-Performance Folding:** Powered by **Nova-Scotia**, utilizing recursive SNARKs to handle SBOMs. * **Interactive Dashboard:** A complete 4-step workflow (Package Manager, Auditor, Vendor, Client) built with **Streamlit**. ## Repository structure The repository contains three main folders: 1. **Empirical**: contains **Benchmarking** and **src**, for the analysis and source code, respectively. 2. **User study**: contains the code and results of the user study. 3. **README_Doc**: contains the images used for this documentation. ## VeriSBOM Architecture The system is divided into four main roles: 1. **Package Manager**: Maintains the package repository with the allowed packages. 2. **Auditor:** Represents the regulatory body marking the compliance status by checking the packages of the package manager. 3. **Software Vendor:** Represents the entity that provides software artefacts and wants to hide the related SBOMs for privacy reasons. He is responsible for the generation of the cryptographic proofs as verifiable substitutes of the hidden packages in SBOMs. 4. **Client:** The end-user who receives the cryptographic proofs along with the software artefact for verifying binding, inclusion and compliance status. ## Web Access (Recommended) **For direct access to the artefact, VeriSBOM can be accessed at this public link** https://verisbom-verisbom-software.hf.space ## Setup & Installation Follow the README within the artefact ## Operational Workflow The application follows a **linear workflow** composed of four steps. Each step depends on the output generated in the previous one. > **Performance Note** Due to the cryptographic operations involved, generating proofs may take some time depending on the number and complexity of the active policy constraints. In the current reference environment, proof generation takes approximately **~5 seconds**, while verification takes around **~3 seconds per proof**. ## Step 1 — Package Manager In this step, the **Package Manager initialises the package repository**. ### Instructions 1. Open the **Package Manager** tab. 2. Click **`Load repository`**. > For convenience, the system automatically loads a **default repository containing packages from the NPM ecosystem**. ### Expected Output After successful execution: - A **green confirmation message** is displayed. - The **package list** appears on the left panel. - The **dependencies of each package** can be inspected on the right panel using the search bar. - A **dependency graph** is displayed at the bottom of the interface. ## Step 2 — Auditor In this step, the **Auditor defines policy constraints** that will be applied to the packages in the repository. ### Instructions 1. Enter a **policy name** (e.g., `Vulnerabilities`, `MIT License`). 2. Click **`Add`** to create the policy constraint. 3. Use the **search bar** to locate target packages. 4. **Uncheck packages** to mark them as **non-compliant**. > By default, **all packages are marked as compliant**. 5. Click **`Save and Propagate`** to apply the policy. ### Optional - Repeat the previous steps to create additional policy constraints. - Remove policies that are no longer required. ### Expected Output - A **green confirmation message** appears. - A **dependency graph visualisation** shows how non-compliance propagates across dependencies for the selected policy (or combination of policies). ## Step 3 — Software Vendor In this step, the **Software Vendor generates cryptographic proofs for a given SBOM**. ### Instructions 1. Upload a **local SBOM file**. > For demonstration purposes, the system automatically loads an **example SBOM**. 2. In the **Selective Disclosure** section: - Select which SBOM packages should be used for proof generation. 3. Click **`Generate Proofs`**. 3. Click **`Download`**. - Download the SBOM with hidden components and plaintext components ### Expected Output - A **progress bar** indicates the proof generation process. - **Green confirmation messages** appear once proofs are generated successfully. > **Important:** Successful proof generation only means that the **cryptographic proof has been constructed correctly**. Compliance with policies is verified only in **Step 4**. ## Step 4 — Client In the final step, the **Client verifies the proofs generated by the vendor**. ### Instructions 1. Upload the **SBOM**. 2. Select a **policy** from the dropdown menu. 3. Click **`Verify`**. ### Expected Output - **Verified (green badge)** The SBOM satisfies the selected policy. - **Failed (red badge)** The verification failed, and the interface displays the reason for the failure.
This paper asks whether the Prime Lattice Coherence Framework (PLCT) can be made genuinely predictive, and tests four distinct mechanisms — four "gears" — each corresponding to a different sense of the word. Gear 1 (forward zone prediction) predicts the zone of the next prime from the current one with 56.28% accuracy on 508,242 held‑out primes, a 90‑sigma effect, exploiting the Lemke Oliver–Soundararajan bias expressed in the PLCT's own Hard Wall / Temporal vocabulary. Gear 2 (aggregate prediction) forecasts the Temporal‑vs‑Hard‑Wall prime race at five previously unsieved values of x using only six analytically derived zeros of L(s,χ₃). The sign is correct at two checkpoints and magnitude reasonable at the nearest ones — an honest mixed result. Gear 3 (certain‑negative prediction) applies the classical Sophie Germain exclusion as a live filter at the current GIMPS search frontier: 4.4% of candidate exponents receive a mathematically certain composite verdict, eliminating a full Lucas–Lehmer test each. Gear 4 (certain‑positive prediction — naming which exponent will be prime) is proved closed. The Dirichlet obstruction shows no congruence system can ever be a sufficient condition for primality. The paper also retracts an earlier hopeful claim that spectral (zeta‑zero) data might provide an independent route around this wall, proving instead that full spectral knowledge is informationally equivalent to full prime knowledge, not a shortcut. The only remaining paths are direct computation (Lucas–Lehmer, AKS) or mathematics with no current existence
Ilango (FOCS 2025) invented effectively zero-knowledge proofs, a new variant of zero-knowledge. We reformulate it in the language of logic and give simple proofs (under the same assumptions as Ilango (FOCS 2025)) of its existence and of the key property defined in Ilango (FOCS 2025) that it is "indistinguishable from true" (that property is in Ilango (FOCS 2025) a part of the definition of the prover, not its consequence). Using the theory of proof complexity generators we show that the concept can be turned it into a genuinely zero-knowledge proofs, assuming a conjecture from the theory about the existence of a hard generator and allowing the parties to share a common random string.
Цифровая трансформация страховой отрасли и внедрение продуктов параметрического страхования требуют пересмотра подходов к обеспечению доверия между участниками сделки. Ключевым вызовом становится выбор архитектуры доверенной третьей стороны, которая могла бы гарантировать не только юридическую значимость транзакций, но и их защищенность в условиях растущих угроз. Существующие централизованные модели, доказавшие эффективность в массовом сегменте, часто не отвечают требованиям прозрачности и безопасности, критически важным для крупных сделок перестрахования и рынков связанного со страхованием капитала. Целью работы является сравнительный анализ трех архитектурных подходов к построению доверенной третьей стороны: традиционной централизованной на базе инфраструктуры открытых ключей, децентрализованной на базе блокчейна и гибридной. Для объективизации выбора применяется двухэтапная методика системного анализа: метод главных компонент для снижения размерности и визуализации компромиссов, а также многокритериальный анализ решений для ранжирования архитектур. Особое внимание уделено теоретическим ограничениям распределенных систем («трилемма блокчейна», «проблема оракула»), моделированию векторов атак и стратегиям их минимизации. Источником данных послужили экспертные оценки, полученные методом «Дельфи». Исследование показало, что архитектура на базе блокчейна является оптимальной для задач перестрахования благодаря высокой скорости мобилизации ликвидности. В то же время для массового розничного сегмента экономически наиболее эффективной остается централизованная модель. Обоснована необходимость перехода к гибридным архитектурам, использующим криптографические доказательства с нулевым разглашением и доверенные среды исполнения. Такой подход позволяет сочетать высокую пропускную способность с проверяемой безопасностью, что подтверждается опытом реализации национальных цифровых валют, в частности, цифрового The digital transformation of the insurance industry and the introduction of parametric insurance products require a rethinking of approaches to ensuring trust between transaction parties. A key challenge is choosing a trusted third party architecture that can guarantee not only the legal validity of transactions but also their security in the face of growing threats. Existing centralized models, while proven effective in the mass market, often fail to meet the transparency and security requirements critical for large-scale reinsurance transactions and insurance-linked capital markets. This paper aims to comparatively analyze three architectural approaches to building trusted third parties: a traditional centralized approach based on a public key infrastructure, a decentralized approach based on a blockchain, and a hybrid approach. To objectively evaluate the choice, a two-stage system analysis method is applied: principal component analysis for dimensionality reduction and tradeoff visualization, and multicriteria decision analysis for ranking architectures. Particular attention is paid to the theoretical limitations of distributed systems (the "blockchain trilemma" and "oracle problem"), attack vector modeling, and mitigation strategies. The data source was expert assessments obtained using the Delphi method. The study showed that a blockchain-based architecture is optimal for reinsurance applications due to its high liquidity mobilization speed. However, for the mass retail segment, a centralized model remains the most cost-effective. The study substantiates the need to transition to hybrid architectures using zero-knowledge cryptographic proofs and trusted execution environments. This approach combines high throughput with verifiable security, as evidenced by the experience of implementing national digital currencies, in particular, the Bank of Russia's digital ruble.
Andrea Rizzini, Marco Esposito, Tommaso Gagliardoni, Francesco Bruschi
Federated Learning (FL) is an advancement in Machine Learning motivated by the need to preserve the privacy of the data used to train models. While it effectively addresses this issue, the multi-participant paradigm on which it is based introduces several challenges. Among these are the risks that participating entities may behave dishonestly and fail to perform their tasks correctly. This misbehavior, in turn, also threatens privacy, because an undetected deviation in training or aggregation can silently undermine the confidentiality guarantees that FL was designed to provide. This motivates mechanisms that provide checkable evidence that released checkpoints are consistent with a declared learning specification and an auditable execution trace. In this SoK, we model federated learning as an append-only transcript of submissions, admissions, aggregation, and finalization events, and formalize verifiability as a collection of integrity claims issued by clients and the aggregator, and checked by different verifier classes. We derive a taxonomy of recurring client-side and aggregator-side claims and use it to analyze representative verifiable FL (VFL) systems spanning Zero-Knowledge Proofs (ZKP) and Trusted Execution Environment (TEE) technologies. Our analysis suggests that, while verifiable aggregation is comparatively mature, data verifiability appears feasible but still sparsely adopted in practice, and verifiable training remain costly and rarely scale to modern models.
Incorporating connected mobility data into decision-making brings about significant data security and privacy challenges in next generation transportation systems. The problem becomes worse when the raw traffic data stream contains commuters' sensitive information that could be extracted by successful attackers. The challenges of data security and privacy must be addressed in order to create a secure information sharing environment for next generation transportation systems. ☐ Blockchain technology, which provides a tamper-resistant journal of state transition events, becomes an ideal candidate for realizing the goals of creating secure information sharing frameworks. However, existing blockchain technology and deployments also have their limitations, especially in data privacy. Because the saved data on the blockchain ledger can not be altered, we do not want to make sensitive information publicly available or record false information permanently without an authentication protocol. ☐ Innovations are needed to overcome barriers in blockchain technology for enabling secure and privacy-preserving information sharing in next generation transportation systems. This Ph.D. dissertation introduces three main innovations: (1) a zero-knowledge and Byzantine fault tolerant consensus that brings privacy-preserving to the blockchain consensus level for verifying and processing transactions, Chapter 2; (2) novel privacy-preserving authentication schemes for blockchain networks based on zero-knowledge proofs to increase security and safety in traffic management, autonomous truck fleets and ridesharing, Chapters 3, 4 and 5; and (3) blockchain-inspired architecture designs with access control policies that protect huge amounts of traffic and users' data and log access events into blockchain for traceability and accountability, Chapters 4 and 5.
Traditional secret sharing techniques such as Verifiable Secret sharing (VSS) are vulnerable to quantum attacks by a Cryptographically Relevant Quantum Computer (CRQC) running Shor's algorithm. We observe that the binding a VSS needs is required only at the moment of dealing, and this binding can be made before any CRQC exists. We propose Proof in a Bottle (PiB), which decouples verifiability from long-term binding: standard Pedersen commitments provide zero-knowledge, publicly checkable consistency during a pre-quantum window, while a salted, index-bound hash of the share set, anchored to an immutable public ledger, preserves the binding established in that window into the post-quantum era. The guarantee is explicitly a commit-now, reveal-later one: it protects today's honest dealings against tomorrow's quantum adversary.