For Auditors ARCHIVE
For Auditors: 5-Minute Verification Checklist
This page provides a quick verification path for external auditors evaluating MathLedger's governance claims.
Version Coherence Note: The hosted demo runs the latest demo-capability version (currently v0.2.10). Documentation versions may advance independently. This is intentional: documentation releases do not require demo redeployment. Version coherence is determined by/versions/, not by demo parity. See: Version Number Doctrine.
Expectation: Auditors should expect that some claims will remain permanently ABSTAINED. This is correct behavior and not a failure mode.
5-Minute Verification Checklist
Complete these steps to verify the system's core claims:
Step 1: Open the Hosted Demo (30 seconds)
- Navigate to /demo/
- Confirm the demo loads without errors
- Verify the demo banner shows the latest demo-capability version (currently
v0.2.10-demo-reliability). The demo may lag behind the CURRENT documentation version; this is intentional.
Step 2: Run the Boundary Demo (90 seconds)
- In the demo, click "Boundary Demo: Same Claim, Different Authority"
- Observe the 4-step sequence:
- Key insight: Same mathematical truth, different outcomes based on trust class declaration
Step 3: Verify with Self-Test (60 seconds) — Recommended
The verifier has built-in test vectors that work regardless of demo state:
- Open the Evidence Pack Verifier
- Click "Run self-test vectors"
- Confirm the banner shows SELF-TEST PASSED (3 vectors)
- Observe the results table:
valid_boundary_demo: Expected PASS, Actual PASS → Test Result PASS
- tampered_ht_mismatch: Expected FAIL, Actual FAIL → Test Result PASS
- tampered_rt_mismatch: Expected FAIL, Actual FAIL → Test Result PASS
This proves the verification algorithm works correctly and tamper detection functions as designed.
Step 3 (Alternative): Download from Demo
If you want to verify a pack generated by your own demo session:
- After running the boundary demo, click "Download Evidence Pack"
- Save the JSON file locally
- Upload to the Evidence Pack Verifier
- Click "Verify" and confirm PASS
Ready-to-Verify Examples (No Demo Required)
If the demo is unavailable or you want to verify without running it, use these pre-generated examples:
Download Examples
The file /v0.2.14/evidence-pack/examples.json contains:
| Example | Expected Result | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
valid_boundary_demo | PASS | Shows a correctly-formed evidence pack from a boundary demo |
tampered_ht_mismatch | FAIL (h_t mismatch) | Demonstrates detection of tampered H_t field |
tampered_rt_mismatch | FAIL (r_t mismatch) | Demonstrates detection of tampered reasoning artifacts |
Verification Steps
- Download
examples.json - Copy the content of
examples.valid_boundary_demo.packto a new file - Open the Evidence Pack Verifier
- Upload the pack JSON
- Click Verify and observe PASS
- Repeat with
tampered_ht_mismatch.packand observe FAIL
Why This Matters
These examples prove:
- The verification algorithm is deterministic (same input always produces same hash)
- Tamper detection works (any modification is detected)
- No demo required (auditors can verify offline using the same code)
What This Version Claims
This version (v0.2.14) demonstrates:
- Deterministic canonicalization of reasoning artifacts (RFC 8785-style)
- Cryptographic binding via H_t = SHA256(R_t || U_t)
- Trust class separation where ADV claims are excluded from R_t
- Replay verification using the same code paths as live execution
- Self-auditing capability via the evidence pack verifier
What This Version Does NOT Claim
Explicit non-claims:- No formal verification — FV (Formally Verified) claims always return ABSTAINED. There is no Lean/Z3/Coq integration.
- No multi-model consensus — Only one partitioner template is active. The "multi-model arena" is not operational.
- No learning loop — RFL (Reinforcement from Ledger) is not active. The system does not learn from past decisions.
- No production hardening — This is a demonstration, not a production system. Do not use for real financial or legal decisions.
- No guaranteed uptime — The hosted demo may be unavailable. Local execution is always possible.
Demo Reliability Note
The hosted demo runs on shared infrastructure with known limitations:
- "Server lost proposal state" — If you see this error, refresh the page and retry. This is a demo hosting limitation (stateless container restart), not user error.
- Evidence pack download timing — The boundary demo sequence is scripted and does not persist state for download. Use the verifier self-test for reliable verification.
- Intermittent 503 errors — Network tab may show failed requests to analytics endpoints. These do not affect demo functionality.
Key Documentation Links
| Document | Description |
|---|---|
| Scope Lock | What this version does and does not demonstrate |
| Invariants | Tier A/B/C enforcement status with explicit counts |
| Field Manual | Obligation ledger driving version promotions |
| Hostile Demo Rehearsal | Pre-prepared answers to skeptical questions |
| How the Demo Explains Itself | UI self-explanation integration points |
Field Manual (Why It Exists)
The Field Manual (fm.tex/pdf) is an internal constraint artifact, not marketing documentation.
It is not rewritten yet; it is used to surface obligations and gaps.How auditors should use it:
- Cross-reference claims — If a feature is claimed, check FM for caveats
- Look for "TODO" and "OBLIGATION" — Explicit acknowledgments of gaps
- Compare versions — FM changes show what was addressed between releases
- Trust gaps over features — The gaps we document are more honest than features we claim
Local Verification (Alternative Path)
If the hosted demo is unavailable, verify locally:
git clone https://github.com/helpfuldolphin/mathledger
cd mathledger
git checkout v0.2.14-governance-explanation
uv run python demo/app.py
Open http://localhost:8000
The local demo produces identical evidence packs that can be verified with the same auditor tool.
Audit Closure Records
This project maintains authoritative closure matrices that document all BLOCKING, MAJOR, and MINOR audit findings with evidence of resolution.
| Version | Closure Matrix |
|---|---|
| v0.2.12 | CLOSURE_MATRIX_v0.2.12.md |
| v0.2.9 | CLOSURE_MATRIX_v0.2.9.md |
| v0.2.7 | CLOSURE_MATRIX_v0.2.7.md |
| v0.2.4 | CLOSURE_MATRIX_v0.2.4.md |
| v0.2.3 | CLOSURE_MATRIX_v0.2.3.md |
Raw audit transcripts are preserved in the repository for completeness, but are not part of the primary evaluator path. Use closure matrices for authoritative status.
Questions?
For technical questions about this verification process, see the Hostile Demo Rehearsal document which addresses common skeptical questions with prepared answers.
Contact
Ismail Ahmad Abdullah- ismail@mathledger.ai (primary)
- ismail.abdullah.23@cnu.edu (backup)