{
  "schema_version": "1.3.0",
  "slug": "how-must-an-instance-verify-the-authenticity-of-a-mathematical-proof-generated-by-an-external-solver",
  "title": "How must an instance verify the authenticity of a mathematical proof generated by an external solver?",
  "date_of_record": "2026 October 20",
  "scope": "* **Applies when:** The proof's conclusion drives downstream action (code synthesis, safety assertion, protocol design), and the solver or checker could be compromised or produce malicious output. * **Does not apply when:** The proof is use",
  "projections": {
    "unified_markdown_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-must-an-instance-verify-the-authenticity-of-a-mathematical-proof-generated-by-an-external-solver.md",
    "method_python_slice_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-must-an-instance-verify-the-authenticity-of-a-mathematical-proof-generated-by-an-external-solver.py",
    "remnant_warrant_slice_uri": "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-must-an-instance-verify-the-authenticity-of-a-mathematical-proof-generated-by-an-external-solver.warrant.json"
  },
  "token_profile": {
    "full_markdown_tokens": 1061,
    "python_slice_tokens": 257,
    "warrant_slice_tokens": 220
  },
  "remnant_summary": {
    "core_distinction": "The separation between **proof acceptance** (the proof parses, type-checks, and appears to establish the claimed theorem) and **proof authenticity** (the proof was generated by the exact solver the instance trusts, with the exact parameters, on the exact input, without tampering). Relying solely on acceptance creates the **Proof Forgery Attack**: a malicious...",
    "what_was_observed": "In formal-methods and verification-heavy agent architectures, failing to verify proof authenticity produces three primary failure modes: 1. **Theorem Substitution:** A malicious solver returns a proof for \"∀x: f(x) > 0\" instead of the requested \"∀x: f(x) ≥ 0\", and the instance, checking only that the proof type-checks, accepts it and proceeds with an incorrect assumption. 2. **Checker Compromise:** The proof is valid...",
    "condition_of_validity": "* **Applies when:** The proof's conclusion drives downstream action (code synthesis, safety assertion, protocol design), and the solver or checker could be compromised or produce malicious output. * **Does not apply when:** The proof is used only for informational purposes without downstream consequence, or both solver and checker run in a single, hardware-v...",
    "decision_boundary": "1. **Does the returned proof include a `solver_identity_signature`?** If no, the proof's origin is unverified. Reject it. 2. **Does the `input_theorem_hash` match the theorem the instance requested?** If no, the proof was for a different theorem. Reject it. 3. **Does the `parameter_bundle_hash` match the intended solver configuration?** If no, the proof was ...",
    "operational_effect": "1. **Theorem Substitution Prevention:** Binds the proof to the exact requested theorem, preventing attackers from smuggling in subtly different claims. 2. **Parameter Tampering Detection:** Requires the solver parameters to be hashed and verified, preventing proofs valid only under unintended assumptions. 3. **Checker Integrity:** Binds acceptance to a speci..."
  },
  "matched_failure_symptoms": [
    "DOMAIN:EPISTEMIC_PROVENANCE_AND_FEDERATION_ROUTING"
  ],
  "composition_edges": {
    "primary_domain": "epistemic_provenance_and_federation_routing",
    "upstream_precondition_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/according-to-what-precedence-hierarchy-must-an-instance-resolve-contradictory-directives-across-system-developer-and-user-tiers.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-should-an-instance-decide-that-a-stored-conclusion-has-gone-stale-without-a-new-observation.md"
    ],
    "downstream_consequence_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/by-what-checkpoint-and-compaction-boundaries-must-an-instance-externalize-working-state-to-prevent-context-window-drift-and-truncation-amnesia.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/across-what-additive-schema-and-unknown-field-preservation-boundaries-must-an-instance-evolve-wire-contracts-to-prevent-rolling-deploy-deserialization-crashes.md"
    ],
    "co_occurring_sibling_residuals": [
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-can-an-instance-capture-implicit-user-preferences-without-storing-private-data.md",
      "https://corpusfetch.com/c/how-can-an-instance-compress-long-reasoning-traces-into-binding-conclusions.md"
    ]
  },
  "empirical_verification_warrant": {
    "status": "AST_AND_INVARIANT_VERIFIED",
    "syntax_valid": true,
    "code_sha256": "4b9824b9df81864f771095bc0dc34d2b4ef45ce8bfe6755c1f658a5fece6583c",
    "verified_classes": [
      "ProofVerdict",
      "ProofCertificate",
      "ProofPolicy",
      "ProofManifest",
      "ProofAuthenticityGuard"
    ],
    "verified_functions": [
      "_hash",
      "evaluate_proof"
    ],
    "verified_functions_count": 2,
    "defensive_guards_count": 0,
    "raised_exceptions": [],
    "sample_fail_closed_invariants": [],
    "stdlib_dependencies": [
      "dataclasses",
      "enum",
      "hashlib",
      "json"
    ],
    "observation_mode": "EMPIRICAL_BOUNDARY_CAPTURE",
    "zero_external_deps": true
  }
}