docs: papers 14 + 15, whitepaper rewrite, After-X ladder reframe

[TSavo]

Summary

Definitive framing pass over docs/papers/. Seven commits:

• Paper 14 — After Trust: The Universal Correctness Bundle (new, ~5.1k words). Closes the 04/06/07/09/12/13 arc with the .proof-as-universal-guarantee thesis: the substrate's deliverable is a constant-size, locally-verifiable correctness bundle whose verifier reduces to CID recomputation, byte comparison, and signature checking. States the bedrock thesis (deployed runtime layer is overwhelmingly C/C++ source already in the existing lifter chain's reach), the supply-graph thesis (registries lift as content-addressed dependency graphs cross-linked to native source), the Bridge collapse (most cross-language runtime behavior reduces to finite calling-convention shims), and the five plateau axes. Six lemmas: bedrock dominance, Bridge minimality, plateau finiteness, domain agnosticism, constant-size verification under composition, CVE blast-radius as SELECT.
• Paper 15 — After Civilization: Why the Author Doesn't Matter (new, ~3.8k words). The capstone. Paper 14 moved trust off the consumer; this moves identity off the producer. Once verification is local and content-addressed, the author of a .proof is epistemically irrelevant. Generalizes Satoshi's move from money to correctness, and goes further: the author's absence (anonymous, dead, discredited, coerced, erased) is structurally costless. Four lemmas, including self-demonstration: the paper's own thesis is verified by recomputing its CID without trusting its byline. Closes with the seal (information wants to be free) and an epilogue after the signature (now you don't need me).
• Whitepaper rewrite (paper 01) — full rewrite (~3.0k words). Leads with .proof as the shipped artifact and the bedrock thesis, adds the after-trust frame, the supply graph, the prove portfolio, the honesty section, and the After-X ladder pointers. Preserves the measured discharge tiers, the trust-depth TOML block, the memento shape, the cypherpunk lineage. CLI wording reconciled to the real surface.
• Retitle papers 3/4/5/9 to the After-X form — H1 headings only; filenames unchanged (link-stable). "After Bluepapers: Substrate, Not Blockchain", "After the Standardization Question: ...", "After Single-Party Transport: ...", "After Universal-Language Ambitions: Lossy Boundary Compression ...".
• README reframed around the inductive ladder — index now leads with the ladder framing (paper 1 = pitch, paper 2 = formal spec, papers 3-15 = After-X rungs). Paper 15 index entry added. "Future papers (planned)" cleaned: pruned "Trust as a local decision" (subsumed by paper 14); kept the genuinely-still-planned entries.

No em-dashes or en-dashes anywhere in the changed lines. Sign-offs are T Savo.

Test plan

• Render-check the markdown in docs/papers/
• Verify all relative links in papers 14, 15, and the README resolve (especially the 12- and 13- companion links, present here via the AMP v0.1.0 (draft): Algorithm Memento Protocol — substrate self-hosts its own production mechanism #544 base)
• Confirm papers 12 and 13 are NOT removed by this diff (base is post-AMP v0.1.0 (draft): Algorithm Memento Protocol — substrate self-hosts its own production mechanism #544 main)
• grep -P '[—–]' docs/papers/{01,03,04,05,09,14,15}-*.md docs/papers/README.md returns nothing

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Documentation
  • Substantially revised whitepaper with expanded coverage of the .proof deliverable, verification lattice, and institutional trust boundaries.
  • Added two new papers on universal correctness bundles and author-independent verification.
  • Updated documentation index and paper titles for clarity.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This PR adds two new papers (14 and 15) to the ProveKit documentation that establish the .proof file as a universal, author-independent correctness bundle. It simultaneously restructures the existing whitepaper and retitles four prior papers with contextual framing prefixes to position them within an expanded narrative sequence. The README is updated to reflect the new reading order as an "inductive ladder."

Changes

Documentation Expansion: Two New Papers and Whitepaper Restructuring

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Title Framing for Existing Papers docs/papers/03-substrate-not-blockchain.md, docs/papers/04-vertical-stack-and-standardization.md, docs/papers/05-witness-pluralism-and-jurisdiction-neutral-transport.md, docs/papers/09-lossy-boundary-compression.md	Five papers have titles updated with "After X:" prefixes (e.g., "After Bluepapers: Substrate, Not Blockchain"). These prefixes contextualize each paper's position in the narrative sequence.
Universal Correctness Bundle Thesis (Paper 14) docs/papers/14-after-trust-the-universal-correctness-bundle.md	New paper (281 lines) establishing .proof as a constant-size, locally verifiable correctness bundle. Introduces bedrock thesis (C/C++ runtime bottom), supply-graph thesis (registries as content-addressed proof graphs), bridge-collapse thesis (runtime shims finite), and five plateau axes for bounded catalog growth. Extends the approach across software, hardware, legal, finance, compliance, medical devices, and supply chains. Formalizes six lemmas with proof sketches.
Author-Independent Verification (Paper 15) docs/papers/15-after-civilization-why-the-author-doesnt-matter.md	New paper (233 lines) arguing that .proof verification is author-independent: accept/reject depends only on bytes, CIDs, signatures, receipts, and local policy, not author identity. Demonstrates costless author absences, relocates accountability to keys, and frames reputation as a convenience cache. Includes four lemmas on author-independent verification, costless disappearance, accountability relocation, and self-demonstration.
Whitepaper Restructuring docs/papers/01-whitepaper.md	Substantially rewritten (+110/-66 lines) to shift focus to .proof file as central deliverable. Expands verification lattice and three-tier discharge explanation, reworks "Why it matters" around content-addressed verification, clarifies trust-depth configuration, updates institutional-policy boundary framing, rephrases bedrock and supply-graph theses, updates audience/CLI pathways, clarifies non-claims (not static analyzer/package manager/blockchain), and reasserts .proof as transportable envelope.
Navigation and Index Updates docs/papers/README.md	Reframes directory as "inductive ladder" with explicit read-order rationale. Updates index entries for papers 1–9 with revised titles and framing. Adds entries for papers 14 and 15. Removes one planned paper from future list.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~12 minutes

Possibly related PRs

• TSavo/provekit#87: Updates substrate/.proof trust model documentation with related theses on verification lattice, discharge tiers, and semver-as-contract.
• TSavo/provekit#494: Modifies the same papers (03-substrate-not-blockchain.md) and introduces core deliverable framing (.proof/proofchain) and local validity lemma.
• TSavo/provekit#480: Updates the same documentation and paper titles, including Bluepaper/README entries and related narrative structure.

Poem

🐰 Two new papers hop into the warren,
One proof to bind them, forever sworn.
No author needed, just bytes and keys—
Verification flows like wind through trees. 🌿
The ladder climbs, each rung precise,
Content-addressed truth, local and nice!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5

✅ Passed checks (5 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The PR title accurately summarizes the main changes: addition of papers 14 and 15, a substantial whitepaper rewrite, and reframing of paper titles with an After-X ladder structure.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Commit unit tests in branch ts-paper14-after-trust

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[coderabbitai]

🧹 Nitpick comments (2)

docs/papers/14-after-trust-the-universal-correctness-bundle.md (1)

60-61: ⚡ Quick win

Cite the benchmark source for the throughput/ingestion figures.

The quantified claim here should reference the measurement source (for example, the same benchmark document used in paper 01) so readers can verify methodology and context.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In `@docs/papers/14-after-trust-the-universal-correctness-bundle.md` around lines
60 - 61, The sentence asserting "25 to 31 milliseconds per file per lifter on a
32-core machine" and the resulting "4 to 8 hours" total needs an explicit
citation to the benchmark that produced those throughput/ingestion figures
(e.g., the same benchmark document used in paper 01); add a parenthetical or
footnote reference next to the numeric claim that points to the benchmark report
(including link or bibliographic entry), and briefly note the measurement
context (hardware: 32-core, test corpus size, and per-lifter definition) so
readers can verify methodology and results.

docs/papers/01-whitepaper.md (1)

11-12: ⚡ Quick win

Add a direct citation for the cross-implementation byte-identity claim.

The “Rust peer and C++ peer produce byte-identical outputs” statement is strong and deserves a nearby source pointer (test fixture path, conformance artifact, or CI job) in the same paragraph for traceability.

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

In `@docs/papers/01-whitepaper.md` around lines 11 - 12, The sentence claiming the
Rust and C++ peers produce byte-identical outputs needs a nearby, specific
citation: update the paragraph to reference the exact conformance artifact that
proves this (the cross-implementation byte-identity test or CI job and its
artifact name), e.g., cite the conformance test/fixture or CI job that validates
byte equality for .proof files and include the artifact/test name so readers can
verify the claim; ensure the cited identifier corresponds to the
cross-implementation test that produced identical CIDs using BLAKE3-512.

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.

Nitpick comments:
In `@docs/papers/01-whitepaper.md`:
- Around line 11-12: The sentence claiming the Rust and C++ peers produce
byte-identical outputs needs a nearby, specific citation: update the paragraph
to reference the exact conformance artifact that proves this (the
cross-implementation byte-identity test or CI job and its artifact name), e.g.,
cite the conformance test/fixture or CI job that validates byte equality for
.proof files and include the artifact/test name so readers can verify the claim;
ensure the cited identifier corresponds to the cross-implementation test that
produced identical CIDs using BLAKE3-512.

In `@docs/papers/14-after-trust-the-universal-correctness-bundle.md`:
- Around line 60-61: The sentence asserting "25 to 31 milliseconds per file per
lifter on a 32-core machine" and the resulting "4 to 8 hours" total needs an
explicit citation to the benchmark that produced those throughput/ingestion
figures (e.g., the same benchmark document used in paper 01); add a
parenthetical or footnote reference next to the numeric claim that points to the
benchmark report (including link or bibliographic entry), and briefly note the
measurement context (hardware: 32-core, test corpus size, and per-lifter
definition) so readers can verify methodology and results.

---

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 774010cc-2b9f-456c-9b4a-5e53a2d6e76e

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 26b0c05 and d3f8930.

📒 Files selected for processing (8)

• docs/papers/01-whitepaper.md
• docs/papers/03-substrate-not-blockchain.md
• docs/papers/04-vertical-stack-and-standardization.md
• docs/papers/05-witness-pluralism-and-jurisdiction-neutral-transport.md
• docs/papers/09-lossy-boundary-compression.md
• docs/papers/14-after-trust-the-universal-correctness-bundle.md
• docs/papers/15-after-civilization-why-the-author-doesnt-matter.md
• docs/papers/README.md