Sovereign-Mohawk Claim Verification

Six technical claims are mapped to named files, while their code and proofs remain subject to verification.

Loading preview...

Inspect the Sovereign Mohawk system

A theorem-by-theorem map connects hierarchical Multi-Krum, Rényi privacy accounting, communication bounds, straggler redundancy, succinct proofs, and non-IID convergence with named implementation artifacts, then compares the system’s claimed theory-to-practice coverage.

Try Deep Research

Conduct a rigorous technical audit of the “Sovereign-Mohawk” hierarchical federated-learning system as a set of claims to be verified, not established results. Examine six claimed areas: hierarchical Multi-Krum Byzantine resilience, Rényi differential-privacy accounting, communication lower bounds, probabilistic straggler redundancy, succinct non-interactive verification, and convergence under non-IID data. For each claim, state the theorem assumptions and conclusion, identify the proof and empirical evidence required, and inspect any available artifacts named hierarchical_krum.go, rdp_accountant.go, straggler_resilience.go, zksnark_verifier.go, and convergence_proof.go. Compare the claims with relevant peer-reviewed baselines, test whether code behavior matches the stated mathematics, and flag missing repositories or unverifiable artifacts. End with a claim-by-claim evidence table, reproducibility plan, and publication-readiness assessment. Do not claim that a theorem or implementation is verified unless the cited evidence supports it.

Federated Learning Privacy Proofs

A file map shows where the prompt places privacy accounting and cryptographic checks; verification remains out of scope.

Try Deep Research

Conduct a rigorous technical audit of the “Sovereign-Mohawk” hierarchical federated-learning system as a set of claims to be verified, not established results. Examine six claimed areas: hierarchical Multi-Krum Byzantine resilience, Rényi differential-privacy accounting, communication lower bounds, probabilistic straggler redundancy, succinct non-interactive verification, and convergence under non-IID data. For each claim, state the theorem assumptions and conclusion, identify the proof and empirical evidence required, and inspect any available artifacts named hierarchical_krum.go, rdp_accountant.go, straggler_resilience.go, zksnark_verifier.go, and convergence_proof.go. Compare the claims with relevant peer-reviewed baselines, test whether code behavior matches the stated mathematics, and flag missing repositories or unverifiable artifacts. End with a claim-by-claim evidence table, reproducibility plan, and publication-readiness assessment. Do not claim that a theorem or implementation is verified unless the cited evidence supports it.

Byzantine Dropout Resilience Report

The source outline compares claimed Hierarchical Multi-Krum and probabilistic-redundancy properties and names associated files, without independently verifying guarantees or implementations.

Try Deep Research

Conduct a rigorous technical audit of the “Sovereign-Mohawk” hierarchical federated-learning system as a set of claims to be verified, not established results. Examine six claimed areas: hierarchical Multi-Krum Byzantine resilience, Rényi differential-privacy accounting, communication lower bounds, probabilistic straggler redundancy, succinct non-interactive verification, and convergence under non-IID data. For each claim, state the theorem assumptions and conclusion, identify the proof and empirical evidence required, and inspect any available artifacts named hierarchical_krum.go, rdp_accountant.go, straggler_resilience.go, zksnark_verifier.go, and convergence_proof.go. Compare the claims with relevant peer-reviewed baselines, test whether code behavior matches the stated mathematics, and flag missing repositories or unverifiable artifacts. End with a claim-by-claim evidence table, reproducibility plan, and publication-readiness assessment. Do not claim that a theorem or implementation is verified unless the cited evidence supports it.

Communication Proof Efficiency Analysis

A component table shows where the prompt places communication bounds and succinct arguments; no proof is verified.

Try Deep Research

Conduct a rigorous technical audit of the “Sovereign-Mohawk” hierarchical federated-learning system as a set of claims to be verified, not established results. Examine six claimed areas: hierarchical Multi-Krum Byzantine resilience, Rényi differential-privacy accounting, communication lower bounds, probabilistic straggler redundancy, succinct non-interactive verification, and convergence under non-IID data. For each claim, state the theorem assumptions and conclusion, identify the proof and empirical evidence required, and inspect any available artifacts named hierarchical_krum.go, rdp_accountant.go, straggler_resilience.go, zksnark_verifier.go, and convergence_proof.go. Compare the claims with relevant peer-reviewed baselines, test whether code behavior matches the stated mathematics, and flag missing repositories or unverifiable artifacts. End with a claim-by-claim evidence table, reproducibility plan, and publication-readiness assessment. Do not claim that a theorem or implementation is verified unless the cited evidence supports it.