8 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Marcin Pawlowski
2248a048d4
pd: cover the new cover-traffic config fields in the key() test
The key() coverage test enumerates every SimConfig field, so the five cover-
traffic knobs had to be given alternative values. Caught by the test itself
immediately after the previous commit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:58 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
e35804f29d
pd: cover traffic -- emission quota and the blending timeline
First half of the cover-traffic work: the two new modules and their tests.

quota.py -- the emission budget. Cover traffic gives every node the same number
of emissions per epoch, which only holds while a node block proposals fit inside
its quota. The bind is exact: alpha_max = ln(1-q)/ln(1-f), where alpha is stake
relative to the INFERRED total D_hat, since that is the denominator the lottery
threshold is derived from. In true stake the ceiling carries the estimator ratio,
s_max = (D_hat/D)*alpha_max, with D_hat/D an input rather than an assumption. The
familiar q/f is a small-q approximation that runs 1.7% high and so overstates the
tolerable stake. Sitting on the mean bind overruns the quota half the time, so
max_alpha_for_confidence gives the ceiling that holds with stated probability.

traffic.py -- the timeline. The rest of the simulator samples independent rounds
and draws each hold from the stationary residual, which has no notion of time and
so can never let two messages meet at a relay. Here every node owns one
free-running clock shared by all messages through it, extended lazily so only the
relays actually visited grow one. A clock sampled once still reproduces
mixclock.mix_wait, so single-message statistics are unchanged.

It separates two quantities that are easy to conflate: mixing (messages a relay
holds at once) and blending (messages it has SEEN between consecutive releases).
Blending is the anonymity set -- every broadcast reaches every node, so an
observer cannot tell which of them the relay forwarded. Gaps sampled at a release
are size-biased, so blending is rate*(2M+1)/3, twice the mean hold, not
rate*M/2 as a naive reading gives. Measured within 1-4% of that at M = 3, 10, 30
and linear in the cover rate.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:57 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
c42d030f0d
pd review: document the new columns, pin the coverage notion, drop dead code
Third review pass over the blend material.

Completeness:
- the simulator README documented neither frac_reached_live nor the three
  correlated-churn columns (churn_mode, n_regions, region_locality) that every
  run now writes, and its model section never described correlated outages at all;
- the knowledge graph had no pd nodes -- graphify update had never been run since
  the simulator was added (2643 -> 2968 nodes).

Correctness/coherence:
- section 3.5 quotes coverage without saying which coverage, now that 3.9
  distinguishes all-node from live-network. It is all-node; under uniform churn
  the two agree to 0.001, so nothing in 3.5 turns on it. Said so explicitly;
- 3.9 named its groups AS/region without noting that link latency ignores them.
  Regions are failure and peering domains, not latency domains -- real co-located
  nodes would also be faster, so the clustered delays are if anything pessimistic.

Redundancy:
- style.band_plot was dead: never called by any figure. Removed, with the two
  imports it alone needed;
- the units sentence appeared verbatim in the header note and again opening the
  model section. Dropped the second.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:57 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
0f125b40c6
pd: correlated AS/region churn, and two report caveats corrected
Uncorrelated churn alone was incomplete: real outages take out a datacentre, AS
or region as a unit. Adds failure domains and a correlated churn mode, plus the
metric needed to tell the two apart.

- n_regions / region_locality: nodes belong to equal-sized failure domains, and
  a configurable share of each node peers inside its own domain. Locality is what
  makes a failure domain a connectivity domain -- with region-blind peering,
  dropping whole regions removes a uniformly random set of nodes and is
  indistinguishable from uniform churn. The locality matchings keep the graph
  exactly d-regular (they change where peers are, never how many).
- churn_mode = uniform | regional, swept per topology so both modes are compared
  on the same graph at an identical dead-node count.
- frac_reached_live: coverage of the *responsive* network, alongside coverage of
  all nodes. The two move in opposite directions under correlated failure, so one
  number could not express the result.

Measured (degree 4, 20 domains, 75% locality, half the network dead): clustered
failure leaves the survivors fully connected -- live coverage 1.000 and delivery
equal to the live-relay rate, i.e. nothing lost to routing -- where the same
number of scattered failures gives 0.857 live coverage and loses delivery to
broken routes. Correlated outages are gentler on the survivors than uniform
churn, while stranding the dead domains. Verify check 8 anchors this.

Also, per review of the caveats: exact d-regularity is a protocol requirement
rather than a modelling simplification, and the timing-correlation adversary is
deferred because it is only meaningful once the network emits cover traffic,
which this simulator does not yet do.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:56 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
81c48a38ab
pd review: model completeness, stale numbers, figure coherence
Correctness/completeness pass over the blend material only (TSI untouched).

- report Model section (2) was missing two of the six axes: messaging
  redundancy (R cascades, first-arrival combination) and the emission/linking
  model (30 s stake-proportional cadence, what counts as linked) were defined
  only inline in the findings;
- method note still claimed 200 rounds x 8 topologies, contradicting the 1000
  x 8 the tables now come from;
- design guidance carried two superseded numbers: worst-case observation as
  "+0.15 absolute" (it saturates at 1.000 at degree 8, f_adv 0.2) and the
  redundancy example (0.34 -> 0.72, measured 0.342 -> 0.713);
- figure references were incoherent: Figs 2 and 14 were cited in the text but
  never shown, and Fig 8 was shown but never cited. All 15 embedded figures are
  now cited and all citations resolve;
- simulator README listed two parquets for smoke (there are three) and omitted
  redundancy from the propagation/deanon column lists.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:56 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
b5782619d8
pd smoke: exercise the multi-cascade path end-to-end
smoke.yaml never set redundancy > 1, so the R-cascade aggregation and the two
redundancy figures were only covered by unit tests, never by the end-to-end run.
Adding redundancy: [1, 2] takes smoke from 17 to 19 of the 21 figure builders
(only delay_vs_N and the churn-percolation figure need grids smoke does not have).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:56 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
9b03a68a84
Add linkability, messaging redundancy and churn percolation to pd; report
Extends the pd Blend simulator along two axes the deanonymization model
opened up, adds the reports/blend/pd report of record, and fixes three
correctness defects found while reviewing the result.

Linkability over time (pd.linkability):
- time to link an emitter ~ 30s*ln(1/(1-alpha))/(stake*q): inversely
  proportional to stake, so a 5% staker is linked in ~2 days and a 0.001%
  staker only after ~27 years;
- time to certify a node's stake >= theta from the count of attributable
  observations (relative precision ~1/sqrt(N)): sizing a node costs 100-400x
  more than identifying it, and sub-0.1% stake is practically unlearnable.
Both are closed forms over the exact deanonymization rates and a
stake-proportional 30 s emission cadence, checked against a Monte-Carlo of
the emission process in verify.

Messaging redundancy (R independent cascades per emission, R = 1..4):
- `redundancy` knob threaded through config/rng/propagation/engine/metrics/
  sweep; a node receives from whichever cascade reaches it first, so arrival
  times combine element-wise. Delivery and capture both follow 1-(1-x)^R, so
  redundancy trades reliability against anonymity and divides time-to-link
  by ~R. Measured: delivery 0.34 -> 0.81 at 30% churn for R = 1 -> 4, while a
  1%-staker's time to link falls 10 d -> 2.5 d.
- Redundancy buys NO coverage: a cascade only delivers if the sender could
  already route to its relay, so every delivered cascade floods the sender's
  own component. Coverage is flat in R to four decimals at every degree.
- Near the percolation threshold the cascades fail together rather than
  independently, so redundancy under-delivers against 1-(1-p1)^R there.

Churn percolation (configs/percolation.yaml, verify check 7):
- the flood only crosses responsive nodes, so it lives on the responsive
  sub-graph -- site percolation on a d-regular graph. A network survives churn
  only up to u_c = 1 - 1/(degree-1); measured collapse lands on the predicted
  threshold for every degree (3 -> 0.50, 6 -> 0.80, 16 -> 0.93), which inverts
  into the sizing rule degree > 1 + 1/(1-u).

Correctness fixes:
- redundancy delay used the fastest cascade's own full delay, which
  over-states it (min-max vs max-min); now the element-wise earliest arrival,
  reducing exactly to the single-cascade model at R = 1 (test);
- the "redundancy improves coverage" claim was false in both the report and
  the simulator README -- removed and replaced with the measured result;
- per-hop latency is degree-dependent (1.5 s at degree 16 to 2.7 s at degree
  3), not a flat 1.6 s; and the worst-case observation figure was averaged
  over degrees -- at degree 8 and f_adv = 0.2 it is 0.83 -> 1.000.

Statistics: round counts raised for resolution rather than speed -- 8000
rounds per cell in the main sweep, 9600 in the redundancy study, 6400 in the
percolation study, giving SEM <= 0.009 on every delivery rate and <= 0.04 s
on every delay mean. The previous redundancy grid (144 rounds/cell) produced a
non-monotonic delivery curve; it is now monotonic and within 0.015 of theory.
Adversary and deanonymization metrics remain closed-form and exact.

reports/blend/pd: the report of record -- peering-degree trade-offs across
speed, observation, eclipse, deanonymization and reliability, plus the
time-to-link, stake-inference, redundancy and churn-threshold sections, with
21 figures of record and an explicit sampling-error statement.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:55 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
6ad63ce2f3
Add pd: peering-degree Blend Monte-Carlo graph simulator
Static-graph simulator quantifying how a node's peering degree trades off
propagation speed, adversary exposure, deanonymization, and reliability in the
Blend network. Scales to 1e6 nodes (sparse CSR + sampled Dijkstra); the
adversary and deanonymization metrics are exact at every N.

Model (ms): seeded d-regular peer graph (matching-union), Blend cascade
(sender -> blend_hops timed-release mix relays -> final flood), geographic link
base + exponential transport jitter, per-node processing lag, free-running
release-clock mixing.

Metrics:
- propagation: full-delay mean/p50/p90/p99, path/broadcast split, coverage times
- reliability: message success-delivery-rate ~ (1-unresponsive_frac)^blend_hops
  and flood coverage, with unresponsive nodes modelled as routing holes
- adversary (exact): observed/eclipsed fractions, random + worst-case placement
- deanonymization (exact): P(whole blend path adversarial) ~ f_adv^blend_hops,
  and full deanonymization (path adversarial AND honest sender peered with an
  adversary) = deanon_rate * observed_frac

Deterministic blake2b seed streams, three parquet tables, joblib parallelism,
memguard, an analytic verify harness, 50 unit tests, and an auto-installing
Makefile.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:55 +02:00