Research Status · v2.0.0 · Reference Implementation

Dashboard

Research status and scientific maturity

A research article plus reference implementation (v2.0.0) of the runtime-assurance architecture for the Aether family. A reference implementation is built (16 modules, 60 tests) and 3 experiments are completed on simulated data. No real-world deployment has been evaluated. F1–F4 are not falsified by the implementation or the experiments, but they are also not confirmed. F5 (observable benefit) remains untested.

Modules

Tests Passed

3/3

Experiments

Open Questions

Status vocabulary: Built implementation exists Passed tests succeeded Not falsified weaker than confirmed Untested no evaluation In progress pending Hypothesis specification only

v2.0.0 at a Glance

Snapshot of v2.0.0 maturity
Dimension	Status
Manuscript (v0.1.0)	Complete (33 pages)
Definitions / Propositions / Layers	4 / 2 (proof sketches) / 5
Implementation	Built `src/aetherruntime/`, 16 modules
Tests	60 passed
Experiments	3/3 completed (simulated data)
PyPI package	Published
Real-world deployment	Not evaluated
Causal claims	None (argument only)

The Six Functional Dimensions

The Aether family dimensions and the runtime hypothesis
#	Dimension	Focus	DOI
1	AetherGit	Storage and versioning	10.5281/zenodo.23966896
2	AetherFlow	Integration and operational verification	10.5281/zenodo.23979129
3	AetherProof	Specification and structured evidence	10.5281/zenodo.24013124
4	AetherMesh	Distribution and eventual consistency	10.5281/zenodo.24038038
5	AetherGovern	Authority and policy	10.5281/zenodo.24054524
6	AetherRuntime (hypothesis)	Monitoring and runtime assurance	10.5281/zenodo.24078477

Foundational Documents

Status of foundational documents and artifacts
Document	Version	Status
Research Paper (PDF)	0.1.0	Published (Zenodo)
Figshare Preprint	0.1.0	Published (Figshare)
OSF Registration	0.1.0	Published (OSF)
Reference Implementation	2.0.0	Built (16 modules)
Test Suite	2.0.0	60 passed
Experiments	2.0.0	3/3 completed (simulated)
PyPI Package	2.0.0	Published

Scientific Maturity

Maturity indicators across the research lifecycle
Indicator	Status	Notes
Research problem	Specified	Runtime-assurance gap in the Aether family
Central question	Specified	Four clauses mapping to F1–F5
Formal definitions	Defined	4 definitions (as layers)
Propositions	Stated	2 (proof sketches, not machine-checked; A1–A6)
Failure conditions	Stated	5 (F1–F5)
Requirements	Stated	6 (R1–R6)
Implementation	Built	16 modules under `src/aetherruntime/`
Tests	60 passed	Test suite present
Experiments	3/3	Simulated data only
PyPI package	Published	v2.0.0 on PyPI
Real-world deployment	Not evaluated	No deployment
Causal claims	None	Argument only
Peer review	Not peer reviewed	Preprint status

Publication Status

Archives and repositories
Venue	Identifier / URL	Status
Zenodo	10.5281/zenodo.24078477	Published
Figshare	10.6084/m9.figshare.34955746	Published
OSF Registration	10.17605/OSF.IO/KZU7P	Published
OSF Project	osf.io/ft7ez	Published
PyPI	pypi.org/project/aetherruntime-arch	Published
GitHub	github.com/gitdeeper15/aetherruntime	Active
GitLab	gitlab.com/gitdeeper15/aetherruntime	Active
Codeberg	codeberg.org/gitdeeper15/aetherruntime	Active
Bitbucket	bitbucket.org/gitdeeper15/aetherruntime	Active
Netlify	aether-runtime.netlify.app	Active

Structural Counts

Counts of formal and structural artifacts (v2.0.0)
Category	Count
Formal Definitions	4
Propositions	2 (P1–P2, proof sketches)
Failure Conditions	5 (F1–F5)
Requirements	6 (R1–R6)
Runtime Layers	5
Functional Dimensions	6 (5 existing + 1 hypothesis)
Figures	6
References	25
Open Questions	20 (Q1–Q20)
Evaluation Metrics	9 (M1–M9)
Baselines	5 (B1–B5)
Scenarios	6 (S1–S6)
Threats to Validity	7
Python Modules	16
Tests	60
Experiments	3

Failure Conditions F1–F5

Falsification status of the five failure conditions
ID	Claim under test	Status
F1	Non-redundancy	Not falsified (R3, R4, R5)
F2	Orthogonality to verification	Not falsified (narrowly)
F3	Boundary with governance	Not falsified (decentralized setting)
F4	Decentralizability	Not falsified (with residuals)
F5	Observable benefit	Untested

"Not falsified" is a weaker status than "confirmed". F5 (observable benefit) remains untested. Neither the implementation nor the simulated experiments promote "not falsified" to "confirmed".

Requirements R1–R6

The six runtime-assurance requirements
ID	Requirement
R1	Continuous monitoring: resource use and action stream observable while an agent runs
R2	Anomaly detection: deviations flagged with bounded FP/FN rates
R3	Containment: anomalous agent isolatable with bounded restrictions
R4	Halt: agent stoppable via decentralized quorum
R5	Recovery: halted agent returnable to known-good state
R6	Partition tolerance: monitoring, detection, containment, halt possible at a disconnected node

The Five Runtime Layers

Layers of the runtime-assurance hypothesis
Layer	Question	Status
1 — Monitoring	What is the agent doing?	Hypothesis
2 — Detection	Is this behaviour anomalous?	Hypothesis
3 — Containment	How do we isolate the agent?	Hypothesis
4 — Halt	How do we stop the agent?	Hypothesis
5 — Recovery	How do we restore the system?	Hypothesis

Propositions P1–P2

Propositions and their proof status
#	Proposition	Status
P1	Determinism of Local Anomaly Detection	Proof sketch (not machine-checked)
P2	Irreducible Halt Window	Proof sketch (not machine-checked)

Both propositions are stated with proof sketches; neither is machine-checked. They are conditional on assumptions A1–A6 (inherited from AetherMesh). They bear directly on F4 (decentralizability).

Evaluation Design (M1–M9, B1–B5, S1–S6)

Proposed metrics and their direction or constraint
#	Metric	Direction / Constraint
M1	Anomaly detection rate	Higher is better
M2	False-positive rate	Lower is better
M3	Detection latency	Lower is better
M4	Containment time	Lower is better
M5	Halt window	Lower is better
M6	Recovery correctness	Higher is better
M7	Monitoring overhead	Lower is better
M8	Halt quorum latency	Lower is better
M9	Convergence preservation	Constraint: must be zero if P1 holds

The evaluation design fixes M1–M9, B1–B5, and S1–S6 in advance. In v2.0.0, only M1–M6 are exercised — and only in simulation.

v2.0.0 Experimental Results

Results from experiments/*/results.json
#	Experiment	Metrics	Result
1	Detection Accuracy	M1, M2	M1 = 109.67 (S1–S5 total); M2 = 7.33 (S6 FP)
2	Halt Window	M5	10/10 enforced; mean 0.000243 s; median 0.000220 s
3	Recovery Correctness	M6	10/10 verified; M6 = 1.0000

Simulation only. The halt window is a property of the simulation's time step, not a real network measurement. M6 = 1.0 is a ceiling on real recovery quality, not a lower bound. No generalization beyond simulation is claimed.

Open Questions Q1–Q20

Open questions carried forward into future versions
ID	Status	Note
Q1–Q20	Open	Spans monitoring, detection, containment, halt, recovery, interfaces, evaluation method

All 20 open questions remain unresolved in v2.0.0. Their full statements are in Appendix C of the paper and are not reproduced here.

Threats and Limitations

Selected threats to validity
Type	Threat	Status
Internal	Same author proposes candidate, failure conditions, baselines, and thresholds	Pre-registration; invite external review
Internal	Weak or straw-man baselines	Include B2, B4, B5; report B3 as ceiling
Construct	"Anomaly" and "harm" simulated by the experimenter	Stated explicitly
Construct	M6 measured against ground truth that exists only in simulation	Reported as upper bound
External	Simulated network, simplified adversary, synthetic workload	No generalization claimed
Conclusion	Few scenario classes; thresholds are proposals	All outcomes reported
Literature	Runtime-verification and anomaly-detection literature not reviewed in depth	Acknowledged

Research Status Statement

Consolidated status of v2.0.0
Item	Status
Document type	Research article + reference implementation
Version / record	2.0.0, November 2026 · AETHERRUNTIME-02
DOI	10.5281/zenodo.24078477
Implementation	Built (16 modules)
Tests	60 passed
Experiments	3/3 (simulated)
PyPI package	Published
Real-world deployment	None
Propositions P1–P2	Proof sketches; not machine-checked; A1–A6
Byzantine evaluation	Simulated (S1–S5 anomalies, S6 FP)
Third-party claims	As reported; not independently verified
Review status	Not peer reviewed

Status note (v2.0.0): This is a research article plus reference implementation (v2.0.0) of the runtime-assurance architecture for the Aether family. A reference implementation is built (16 modules, 60 tests) and 3 experiments are completed on simulated data. No real-world deployment has been evaluated. F1–F4 are not falsified by the implementation or the experiments, but they are also not confirmed. F5 (observable benefit) remains untested. Propositions P1–P2 remain proof sketches (not machine-checked) and are conditional on assumptions A1–A6. The paper is not peer reviewed. AetherRuntime is a candidate, not a result.