205 lines
9.5 KiB
Python
Raw Normal View History

Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
"""Does the uncle cap need margin under a private-chain attack? — REPORT §8.3 item 5.
Item 5: "Under attack-inflated orphaning the honest-load cap may need extra margin (owed uncles
beyond `U` defer and can age out of `W`); this report does not size it." It could not be sized
before, because the per-node engine had no private-chain strategy (§6.8) the selfish results
came from a global race model in which uncle recovery is a free knob, not a queue with a cap.
With `adversary_strategy="selfish"` in the engine, the whole loop is present: the attack orphans
honest blocks in runs, the survivors queue for the `U` uncle slots of each canonical block, and
whatever does not drain within `W` ages out. This sweeps the cap against the attack to find the
smallest `U` that still recovers, and compares it to the honest rule `U = ceil(rho) + 1`.
Three quantities separate the two failure modes the item conflates:
* ``p_ref_honest`` of the honest blocks the attacker orphaned, how many got referenced at
all. Falls for TWO different reasons, which is why the next column matters.
* ``deep_ref_share`` the share of examined references rejected by the first-fork rule. An
override discards a *chain*, and only its first block is countable (§2.1), so this isolates
"unreferenceable by construction" from "queue too small".
* ``D_hat/D`` what the estimator actually lands on, the thing the cap is sized to protect.
If raising `U` lifts recovery, the cap is the binding constraint and item 5 needs a bigger
number. If it does not, the loss is structural and no cap buys it back.
Run: python scripts/selfish_uncle_margin.py (writes runs/selfish_uncle_margin.parquet)
"""
from __future__ import annotations
from pathlib import Path
import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
from joblib import Parallel, delayed
Item 5 resolved: the uncle cap is not the binding constraint under a private chain With the SM1 adversary in the engine, the question item 5 could not ask is now a measurement. It asked whether the honest-load cap needs margin when the attack inflates orphaning, on the theory that owed uncles would defer past W. They do not. Sweeping U x W x alpha against the attack (512 runs, N=1000, k=256, 8 reps): at the design point and alpha = 0.3, D-hat/D reads 0.729/0.755/0.738/0.758 for U = 1/2/3/4 -- flat within noise -- and no attacked cell reaches the 0.98 bar at any cap or either window. The honest baseline in the same sweep reproduces sec 3.4 exactly (U=1 clears at delta=8; delta=16 needs U=2 at W=10 or W=20 at U=1), which is a useful check that the engine adversary has not disturbed the honest regime. Splitting the honest orphans by WHY they went unreferenced explains it. Neither existing metric separates the two causes -- p_ref mixes them, and deep_ref_share is 0 by construction here because the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before any reference to one is proposed -- so the script walks the tree. Countable share (first block of its fork): 97% honest, 76-81% at alpha=0.2, 59-72% at alpha=0.3. Referenced OF those: 90-93% honest, 84-93% and 80-88% under attack. The queue drains at essentially the honest rate whatever the cap; what collapses is eligibility. An override discards a CHAIN and only its first block has a parent on the surviving chain, so 20-40% of the honest work destroyed is unreferenceable by construction. U governs drain capacity for candidates that exist; it cannot manufacture eligibility. So U = ceil(rho) + 1 stands unchanged and needs no adversarial margin -- and the one place the cap does matter is the honest-load reason it was sized for (U=1 -> 2 lifts the referenced-of-countable rate from 84% to 93% at alpha = 0.2, then U=4 adds nothing). This is the fig36 first-fork ceiling reached from an independent direction: a per-node network simulation with real delays and a real queue, versus a stationary MDP. Two models sharing no code, agreeing on direction and rough size, is the strongest available evidence that the ceiling is a property of the counting rule rather than of either model. Recorded in sec 6.6 and sec 6.8, with the sec 6.8 structural argument corrected: it holds for orphans that are referenceable, but a private chain buries most of them out of reach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:56:23 +02:00
from tsi_sim import lottery, topology
from tsi_sim.blocktree import build_tree_pernode
Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
from tsi_sim.config import SimConfig
Item 5 resolved: the uncle cap is not the binding constraint under a private chain With the SM1 adversary in the engine, the question item 5 could not ask is now a measurement. It asked whether the honest-load cap needs margin when the attack inflates orphaning, on the theory that owed uncles would defer past W. They do not. Sweeping U x W x alpha against the attack (512 runs, N=1000, k=256, 8 reps): at the design point and alpha = 0.3, D-hat/D reads 0.729/0.755/0.738/0.758 for U = 1/2/3/4 -- flat within noise -- and no attacked cell reaches the 0.98 bar at any cap or either window. The honest baseline in the same sweep reproduces sec 3.4 exactly (U=1 clears at delta=8; delta=16 needs U=2 at W=10 or W=20 at U=1), which is a useful check that the engine adversary has not disturbed the honest regime. Splitting the honest orphans by WHY they went unreferenced explains it. Neither existing metric separates the two causes -- p_ref mixes them, and deep_ref_share is 0 by construction here because the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before any reference to one is proposed -- so the script walks the tree. Countable share (first block of its fork): 97% honest, 76-81% at alpha=0.2, 59-72% at alpha=0.3. Referenced OF those: 90-93% honest, 84-93% and 80-88% under attack. The queue drains at essentially the honest rate whatever the cap; what collapses is eligibility. An override discards a CHAIN and only its first block has a parent on the surviving chain, so 20-40% of the honest work destroyed is unreferenceable by construction. U governs drain capacity for candidates that exist; it cannot manufacture eligibility. So U = ceil(rho) + 1 stands unchanged and needs no adversarial margin -- and the one place the cap does matter is the honest-load reason it was sized for (U=1 -> 2 lifts the referenced-of-countable rate from 84% to 93% at alpha = 0.2, then U=4 adds nothing). This is the fig36 first-fork ceiling reached from an independent direction: a per-node network simulation with real delays and a real queue, versus a stationary MDP. Two models sharing no code, agreeing on direction and rough size, is the strongest available evidence that the ceiling is a property of the counting rule rather than of either model. Recorded in sec 6.6 and sec 6.8, with the sec 6.8 structural argument corrected: it holds for orphans that are referenceable, but a private chain buries most of them out of reach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:56:23 +02:00
from tsi_sim.engine import _adversary_mask, run_trajectory
Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
from tsi_sim.memguard import ArrivalMatrixTooLarge
Item 5 resolved: the uncle cap is not the binding constraint under a private chain With the SM1 adversary in the engine, the question item 5 could not ask is now a measurement. It asked whether the honest-load cap needs margin when the attack inflates orphaning, on the theory that owed uncles would defer past W. They do not. Sweeping U x W x alpha against the attack (512 runs, N=1000, k=256, 8 reps): at the design point and alpha = 0.3, D-hat/D reads 0.729/0.755/0.738/0.758 for U = 1/2/3/4 -- flat within noise -- and no attacked cell reaches the 0.98 bar at any cap or either window. The honest baseline in the same sweep reproduces sec 3.4 exactly (U=1 clears at delta=8; delta=16 needs U=2 at W=10 or W=20 at U=1), which is a useful check that the engine adversary has not disturbed the honest regime. Splitting the honest orphans by WHY they went unreferenced explains it. Neither existing metric separates the two causes -- p_ref mixes them, and deep_ref_share is 0 by construction here because the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before any reference to one is proposed -- so the script walks the tree. Countable share (first block of its fork): 97% honest, 76-81% at alpha=0.2, 59-72% at alpha=0.3. Referenced OF those: 90-93% honest, 84-93% and 80-88% under attack. The queue drains at essentially the honest rate whatever the cap; what collapses is eligibility. An override discards a CHAIN and only its first block has a parent on the surviving chain, so 20-40% of the honest work destroyed is unreferenceable by construction. U governs drain capacity for candidates that exist; it cannot manufacture eligibility. So U = ceil(rho) + 1 stands unchanged and needs no adversarial margin -- and the one place the cap does matter is the honest-load reason it was sized for (U=1 -> 2 lifts the referenced-of-countable rate from 84% to 93% at alpha = 0.2, then U=4 adds nothing). This is the fig36 first-fork ceiling reached from an independent direction: a per-node network simulation with real delays and a real queue, versus a stationary MDP. Two models sharing no code, agreeing on direction and rough size, is the strongest available evidence that the ceiling is a property of the counting rule rather than of either model. Recorded in sec 6.6 and sec 6.8, with the sec 6.8 structural argument corrected: it holds for orphans that are referenceable, but a private chain buries most of them out of reach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:56:23 +02:00
from tsi_sim.rng import rng_for, seedseq_for
from tsi_sim.stake import make_stake
Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
HERE = Path(__file__).resolve().parent.parent
RUNS = HERE / "runs"
RUNS.mkdir(exist_ok=True)
EPOCHS = 16
REPS = 8
N_JOBS = 6
BASE = dict(n_nodes=1000, stake_dist="pareto", topology="blend", degree=6,
link_latency_mean=0.5, link_latency_dist="geo", blend_hops=3,
k=256, epochs=EPOCHS, genesis_d_factor=0.5, early_stop=False,
adversary_strategy="selfish")
ALPHAS = [0.0, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4]
DELAYS = [8.0, 16.0] # rho ~ 0.56 (design point) and ~1.0 (the load boundary)
CAPS = [1, 2, 3, 4] # spec allows up to MAX_UNCLES = 4
WINDOWS = [10, 20] # W = 10/f (recommended) and the 20/f widening of §3.4
def _cell(alpha: float, delay: float, u: int, w: int, rep: int) -> dict:
cfg = SimConfig(**BASE, blend_delay_max=delay, max_uncles=u, window_absorption=w,
adversary_frac=alpha, replicate=rep)
row = dict(alpha=alpha, blend_delay_max=delay, max_uncles=u, window_absorption=w, rep=rep)
try:
t = pd.DataFrame(run_trajectory(cfg))
t = t[t.epoch >= EPOCHS // 2]
row |= dict(collapsed=False,
mean_ratio=float(t.mean_ratio.mean()),
fork_rate=float(t.fork_rate.mean()),
p_ref=float(t.p_ref.mean()),
p_ref_honest=float(t.p_ref_honest.mean()),
deep_ref_share=float(t.deep_ref_share.mean()),
max_reorg_depth=int(t.max_reorg_depth.max()),
adv_share=float(t.adv_blocks.sum()
/ max(t.adv_blocks.sum() + t.honest_blocks.sum(), 1)))
except ArrivalMatrixTooLarge:
row |= dict(collapsed=True)
return row
def sweep() -> pd.DataFrame:
jobs = [(a, d, u, w, r) for a in ALPHAS for d in DELAYS for u in CAPS
for w in WINDOWS for r in range(REPS)]
df = pd.DataFrame(Parallel(n_jobs=N_JOBS, backend="loky", inner_max_num_threads=1)(
delayed(_cell)(a, d, u, w, r) for a, d, u, w, r in jobs))
df.to_parquet(RUNS / "selfish_uncle_margin.parquet", index=False)
return df
Item 5 resolved: the uncle cap is not the binding constraint under a private chain With the SM1 adversary in the engine, the question item 5 could not ask is now a measurement. It asked whether the honest-load cap needs margin when the attack inflates orphaning, on the theory that owed uncles would defer past W. They do not. Sweeping U x W x alpha against the attack (512 runs, N=1000, k=256, 8 reps): at the design point and alpha = 0.3, D-hat/D reads 0.729/0.755/0.738/0.758 for U = 1/2/3/4 -- flat within noise -- and no attacked cell reaches the 0.98 bar at any cap or either window. The honest baseline in the same sweep reproduces sec 3.4 exactly (U=1 clears at delta=8; delta=16 needs U=2 at W=10 or W=20 at U=1), which is a useful check that the engine adversary has not disturbed the honest regime. Splitting the honest orphans by WHY they went unreferenced explains it. Neither existing metric separates the two causes -- p_ref mixes them, and deep_ref_share is 0 by construction here because the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before any reference to one is proposed -- so the script walks the tree. Countable share (first block of its fork): 97% honest, 76-81% at alpha=0.2, 59-72% at alpha=0.3. Referenced OF those: 90-93% honest, 84-93% and 80-88% under attack. The queue drains at essentially the honest rate whatever the cap; what collapses is eligibility. An override discards a CHAIN and only its first block has a parent on the surviving chain, so 20-40% of the honest work destroyed is unreferenceable by construction. U governs drain capacity for candidates that exist; it cannot manufacture eligibility. So U = ceil(rho) + 1 stands unchanged and needs no adversarial margin -- and the one place the cap does matter is the honest-load reason it was sized for (U=1 -> 2 lifts the referenced-of-countable rate from 84% to 93% at alpha = 0.2, then U=4 adds nothing). This is the fig36 first-fork ceiling reached from an independent direction: a per-node network simulation with real delays and a real queue, versus a stationary MDP. Two models sharing no code, agreeing on direction and rough size, is the strongest available evidence that the ceiling is a property of the counting rule rather than of either model. Recorded in sec 6.6 and sec 6.8, with the sec 6.8 structural argument corrected: it holds for orphans that are referenceable, but a private chain buries most of them out of reach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:56:23 +02:00
def _decompose_cell(alpha: float, u: int, rep: int, delay: float = 8.0, w: int = 10) -> dict:
"""Split the honest orphans into "unreferenceable" and "eligible but unreferenced".
``p_ref_honest`` alone cannot answer item 5, because it falls for two unrelated reasons: a
block can be *structurally* uncountable (buried behind the first block of an override, so no
proposer may reference it §2.1) or countable but starved of an uncle slot (the queue the
cap `U` drains). Only the second is a cap-sizing problem. ``deep_ref_share`` does not
separate them either: the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before they are
ever proposed, so no deep reference is examined and the metric is 0 by construction here.
This walks the tree and measures both directly.
"""
cfg = SimConfig(**{**BASE, "epochs": 4}, blend_delay_max=delay, max_uncles=u,
window_absorption=w, adversary_frac=alpha, replicate=rep,
prune_arrival=False, windowed_fork_choice=False)
stake = make_stake(cfg, rng_for(cfg))
mask = _adversary_mask(cfg, stake)
flat = np.zeros(cfg.n_nodes, dtype=bool) if mask is None else mask
kids = seedseq_for(cfg).spawn(cfg.epochs + 3)
pl = topology.build_path_latency(cfg, np.random.default_rng(kids[1]))
d_est = np.full(cfg.n_nodes, cfg.genesis_d_factor * float(stake.sum()))
p = lottery.win_probs(stake, d_est, cfg.f)
ws, wn = lottery.sample_wins(p, cfg.epoch_len, np.random.default_rng(kids[3]))
slots, groups = lottery.group_by_slot(ws, wn)
tree, A = build_tree_pernode(slots, groups, pl, cfg, np.random.default_rng(kids[4]),
adversary_mask=mask)
E, T, nb = cfg.epoch_len, cfg.period_T, tree.n_blocks
ids = np.arange(nb)
arrived = (A <= E).any(axis=0)
arrived[0] = True
h = np.where(arrived, tree.height, np.iinfo(np.int64).min)
canon = np.zeros(nb, dtype=bool)
b = int(np.lexsort((-ids, -tree.slot, h))[-1])
while b > 0:
canon[b] = True
b = int(tree.parent[b])
canon[0] = True
in_win = (tree.slot >= 0) & (tree.slot < T)
hon_orph = in_win & ~canon & ~flat[tree.leader]
countable = hon_orph & canon[tree.parent] # first block of its fork
referenced = np.zeros(nb, dtype=bool)
for cb in np.nonzero(canon)[0]:
for un in tree.uncles[cb]:
referenced[un] = True
n, nc = int(hon_orph.sum()), int(countable.sum())
return dict(alpha=alpha, max_uncles=u, rep=rep, honest_orphans=n,
countable_share=(nc / n) if n else np.nan,
referenced_of_countable=(int((countable & referenced).sum()) / nc)
if nc else np.nan,
referenced_of_all=(int((hon_orph & referenced).sum()) / n) if n else np.nan)
def decompose(reps: int = 6) -> pd.DataFrame:
jobs = [(a, u, r) for a in (0.0, 0.2, 0.3) for u in (1, 2, 4) for r in range(reps)]
df = pd.DataFrame(Parallel(n_jobs=N_JOBS, backend="loky", inner_max_num_threads=1)(
delayed(_decompose_cell)(a, u, r) for a, u, r in jobs))
df.to_parquet(RUNS / "selfish_uncle_margin_decomp.parquet", index=False)
return df
def report_decomposition(df: pd.DataFrame) -> None:
print("\n=== why p_ref_honest falls: structure vs queue (delta = 8, W = 10) ===")
print(f"{'alpha':>6} {'U':>2} | {'countable share':>16} {'referenced OF those':>20}"
f" {'referenced of all':>18}")
for a in sorted(df.alpha.unique()):
for u in sorted(df.max_uncles.unique()):
g = df[(df.alpha == a) & (df.max_uncles == u)]
print(f"{a:6.2f} {u:2d} | {g.countable_share.mean() * 100:14.1f}%"
f" {g.referenced_of_countable.mean() * 100:18.1f}%"
f" {g.referenced_of_all.mean() * 100:16.1f}%")
Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
BAR = 0.98 # the §3.6 recovery bar, as a fraction of the true stake
def report(df: pd.DataFrame) -> None:
ok = df[~df.collapsed]
for w in WINDOWS:
print(f"\n=== W = {w} block-intervals ===")
print(f"{'delta':>6} {'alpha':>6} | " + " ".join(f"U={u}" for u in CAPS)
+ " | smallest U >= bar p_ref_h deep_ref fork")
for d in DELAYS:
for a in ALPHAS:
g = ok[(ok.window_absorption == w) & (ok.blend_delay_max == d) & (ok.alpha == a)]
if g.empty:
continue
cells, best = [], None
for u in CAPS:
gu = g[g.max_uncles == u]
m = gu.mean_ratio.mean() if len(gu) else np.nan
cells.append(f"{m:.3f}")
if best is None and m >= BAR:
best = u
ref = g[g.max_uncles == max(CAPS)]
print(f"{d:6.1f} {a:6.2f} | " + " ".join(cells)
+ f" | {str(best):>4} {ref.p_ref_honest.mean():7.3f}"
+ f" {ref.deep_ref_share.mean():8.3f} {ref.fork_rate.mean():5.3f}")
n_col = int(df.collapsed.sum())
if n_col:
print(f"\n{n_col} of {len(df)} runs collapsed into the §6.2 branch (excluded above)")
def main() -> None:
print(f"=== selfish uncle-margin sweep ({len(ALPHAS)*len(DELAYS)*len(CAPS)*len(WINDOWS)*REPS}"
f" runs; recovery bar {BAR}) ===")
report(sweep())
Item 5 resolved: the uncle cap is not the binding constraint under a private chain With the SM1 adversary in the engine, the question item 5 could not ask is now a measurement. It asked whether the honest-load cap needs margin when the attack inflates orphaning, on the theory that owed uncles would defer past W. They do not. Sweeping U x W x alpha against the attack (512 runs, N=1000, k=256, 8 reps): at the design point and alpha = 0.3, D-hat/D reads 0.729/0.755/0.738/0.758 for U = 1/2/3/4 -- flat within noise -- and no attacked cell reaches the 0.98 bar at any cap or either window. The honest baseline in the same sweep reproduces sec 3.4 exactly (U=1 clears at delta=8; delta=16 needs U=2 at W=10 or W=20 at U=1), which is a useful check that the engine adversary has not disturbed the honest regime. Splitting the honest orphans by WHY they went unreferenced explains it. Neither existing metric separates the two causes -- p_ref mixes them, and deep_ref_share is 0 by construction here because the proposer's candidate filter drops deep-fork blocks before any reference to one is proposed -- so the script walks the tree. Countable share (first block of its fork): 97% honest, 76-81% at alpha=0.2, 59-72% at alpha=0.3. Referenced OF those: 90-93% honest, 84-93% and 80-88% under attack. The queue drains at essentially the honest rate whatever the cap; what collapses is eligibility. An override discards a CHAIN and only its first block has a parent on the surviving chain, so 20-40% of the honest work destroyed is unreferenceable by construction. U governs drain capacity for candidates that exist; it cannot manufacture eligibility. So U = ceil(rho) + 1 stands unchanged and needs no adversarial margin -- and the one place the cap does matter is the honest-load reason it was sized for (U=1 -> 2 lifts the referenced-of-countable rate from 84% to 93% at alpha = 0.2, then U=4 adds nothing). This is the fig36 first-fork ceiling reached from an independent direction: a per-node network simulation with real delays and a real queue, versus a stationary MDP. Two models sharing no code, agreeing on direction and rough size, is the strongest available evidence that the ceiling is a property of the counting rule rather than of either model. Recorded in sec 6.6 and sec 6.8, with the sec 6.8 structural argument corrected: it holds for orphans that are referenceable, but a private chain buries most of them out of reach. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:56:23 +02:00
report_decomposition(decompose())
print(f"\nwrote {RUNS}/selfish_uncle_margin{{,_decomp}}.parquet")
Private-chain (SM1) adversary in the per-node engine Sec 6.8 recorded that "the per-node engine has no private-chain strategy", which is why every selfish result came from the global race model with uncle recovery as a free knob eta -- and why open item 5 (does the uncle cap need margin under attack-inflated orphaning?) could not be sized: a knob has no queue to overflow. adversary_strategy="selfish" adds it. The coalition mines one shared private chain and releases under the classic SM1 rules in (a, h) form: adopt when the public chain wins, match at equal length, override at a one-block lead, else wait. Only VISIBILITY is modelled -- the coalition's mining needs no special case, because a member's fork choice already builds on the private tip whenever it leads (that tip has the greatest height among blocks the member can see) and falls back to the public chain exactly when the public chain overtakes, which is the adopt branch. So the private chain forms, extends and is abandoned emergently, and the code that had to be written is the arrival matrix. Design notes worth keeping: - Private blocks reuse the sentinel `withhold` already had (never-arrives), so the existing exclusions from canonical-tip selection apply unchanged; release flips it back and gossips DIRECTLY from the producer, bypassing Blend, since an adversary has no privacy budget to respect and wants the race won. - A private chain breaks the windowed horizon's premise (a hidden block is old enough to look fully-propagated while no honest node has it, and it becomes visible LATER, which the one-way frontier pointer cannot revisit), so selfish forces the exact full scan and full matrix. - Blocks still hidden at epoch end are abandoned and hidden from the coalition too, or the canonical-tip search would crown a chain no honest node saw. Validated against Eyal-Sirer at sub-slot latency: revenue share 0.0356 vs an exact 0.0356 at alpha = 0.1, and above the closed form at higher alpha by just the margin the alpha_eff fork-amplification correction predicts (0.498 vs 0.484 at alpha = 0.4, with fork rate 0.38). Adds p_ref_honest: the reference rate over orphans produced OUTSIDE the coalition. Under a private-chain attack this diverges sharply from p_ref, and only the honest one measures the repair the report credits to uncle counting -- an attacker's own discarded blocks are its loss to bear. test_fork unpacks fork_stats positionally, so its three call sites take the new fifth value. 247 tests pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 12:46:57 +02:00
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()