File size: 11,009 Bytes
87bb7d6 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 | /**
* Deterministic operator voting. dev/constraints/voting.js
* =============================================================================
* WHAT THIS REPLACES
*
* Before this file, the cluster voted like this:
*
* const voteYes = conj.risk_index > 40 || Math.random() < 0.70;
*
* A coin flip. The same event could be approved and denied on consecutive runs,
* no operator could explain its own vote, and the TLA+ safety proof described a
* protocol the implementation did not actually follow.
*
* Now every vote is a pure function of the constraint report. Same event, same
* answer, every time β and each vote carries the rule id that drove it.
*
* HOW A NODE DECIDES
*
* 1. Report BLOCKED -> NO. A hard rule is violated; nobody authorises that.
* 2. Report UNRESOLVED -> NO. "We do not vote on what we have not evaluated."
* 3. Otherwise, check this operator's own published sensitivities.
* A rule that is VIOLATED, or WAIVED by somebody else, is a NO for an
* operator that holds it as a red line.
* 4. Otherwise YES.
*
* WHY A WAIVER DOES NOT BIND EVERY OPERATOR
*
* A waiver is one party's acceptance of a risk. It is not consent from the
* others. An operator sensitive to a waived rule still votes NO β which is what
* makes this a negotiation between independent parties rather than a rubber
* stamp, and is the point of having a quorum at all.
*
* Zero dependencies. Pure functions.
* =============================================================================
*/
'use strict';
const { STATE, SIGNAL } = require('./engine');
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// Operator postures.
//
// Real operators do not share risk tolerances β SSC 8.f asks crewed-vehicle
// operators to publish theirs precisely because they differ. These are each
// node's published red lines: the rules it will not proceed past, even when the
// aggregate signal permits it.
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// NAMING β READ THIS BEFORE QUOTING ANY OF IT
//
// These are NOT agencies casting votes. No space agency has any involvement in
// this system, and presenting one as having voted would be a false claim about
// a real organisation.
//
// They are four REVIEW PROFILES: independent stances that weight different
// rules in our own rulebook, modelled on the published risk priorities of the
// operator types named in each profile's `modelled_on` field. Their purpose is
// to test whether a decision is FRAGILE β if a maneuver is approved under one
// weighting and refused under another, the disagreement is the finding, and it
// is surfaced rather than averaged away.
//
// Each profile's sensitivity is declared in advance and served over the API
// alongside the rulebook, so a reviewer can check that the profile voted the
// way its published stance says it should.
const POSTURES = {
1: {
name: 'ISRO (modelled)',
modelled_on: 'Earth-observation operators with long revisit cycles (e.g. ISRO)',
stance: 'data currency and decision timeline',
sensitive_to: ['FR-10', 'FR-09'],
reason: 'operates Earth-observation assets with long revisit cycles; will not act on stale orbit determination or inside a compressed decision window',
},
2: {
name: 'ESA (modelled)',
modelled_on: 'operators requiring covariance-bearing data before accepting a Pc (e.g. ESA)',
stance: 'covariance basis and probability dilution',
sensitive_to: ['FR-11', 'FR-12'],
reason: 'requires covariance-bearing data before accepting a Pc figure; treats the dilution region as disqualifying',
},
3: {
name: 'JAXA (modelled)',
modelled_on: 'operators treating element-set currency and dilution as coupled (e.g. JAXA)',
stance: 'orbit-determination quality',
sensitive_to: ['FR-10', 'FR-12'],
reason: 'holds element-set currency and dilution as coupled indicators of whether the estimate can be trusted at all',
},
4: {
name: 'SpaceX (modelled)',
modelled_on: 'large-constellation operators where per-maneuver cost compounds (e.g. SpaceX)',
stance: 'propellant cost and execution timeline',
sensitive_to: ['FR-04', 'FR-09'],
reason: 'operates a large constellation where per-maneuver propellant compounds across thousands of assets',
},
};
/**
* Published review profiles β served alongside the rulebook so a vote can be
* checked against its declared stance before it is cast, not rationalised
* after.
*/
function postures() {
return Object.entries(POSTURES).map(([id, p]) => ({
node_id: Number(id), name: p.name, stance: p.stance,
sensitive_to: p.sensitive_to, reason: p.reason,
}));
}
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// One node's vote
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**
* @param {number} nodeId
* @param {object} report a constraint report from engine.evaluate()
* @returns {{vote:'YES'|'NO', rule_id:string|null, reason:string, basis:string}}
*/
function nodeVote(nodeId, report) {
const posture = POSTURES[nodeId] || { name: `node ${nodeId}`, stance: 'general safety', sensitive_to: [] };
if (report.signal === SIGNAL.BLOCKED) {
const b = report.blocking[0];
return {
vote: 'NO', rule_id: b.id, basis: 'HARD_VIOLATION',
reason: `${b.id} ${b.title} β hard rule violated${b.waivable === false ? ' (non-negotiable)' : ''}`,
};
}
if (report.signal === SIGNAL.UNRESOLVED) {
const u = report.unevaluated[0];
return {
vote: 'NO', rule_id: u.id, basis: 'UNEVALUATED',
reason: `${u.id} ${u.title} β not evaluated; this operator does not vote on an unknown`,
};
}
const byId = new Map(report.rules.map((r) => [r.id, r]));
for (const id of posture.sensitive_to) {
const r = byId.get(id);
if (!r) continue;
if (r.state === STATE.VIOLATED) {
return {
vote: 'NO', rule_id: id, basis: 'OPERATOR_RED_LINE',
reason: `${id} ${r.title} β ${posture.name} holds this as a red line (${posture.stance})`,
};
}
if (r.state === STATE.WAIVED) {
const who = (r.waiver && r.waiver.party) || 'another operator';
return {
vote: 'NO', rule_id: id, basis: 'WAIVER_NOT_ACCEPTED',
reason: `${id} ${r.title} β waived by ${who}; ${posture.name} does not accept another party's exception`,
};
}
}
return {
vote: 'YES', rule_id: null, basis: report.signal === SIGNAL.COMPLETE ? 'ALL_RULES_SATISFIED' : 'NO_RED_LINE_TOUCHED',
reason: report.signal === SIGNAL.COMPLETE
? 'all applicable flight rules satisfied'
: `no rule in ${posture.name}'s published sensitivities is violated`,
};
}
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// The poll
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**
* Run the go/no-go poll across the online nodes.
*
* @param {Array} onlineNodes [{ id, name, online }]
* @param {object} report
* @param {number} quorum
*/
function poll(onlineNodes, report, quorum = 3) {
const votes = (onlineNodes || []).filter((n) => n && n.online !== false).map((n) => {
const v = nodeVote(n.id, report);
return {
node_id: n.id,
node_name: n.name || (POSTURES[n.id] && POSTURES[n.id].name) || `node ${n.id}`,
vote: v.vote,
rule_id: v.rule_id,
basis: v.basis,
reason: v.reason,
};
});
const yes = votes.filter((v) => v.vote === 'YES').length;
const approved = yes >= quorum;
return {
status: approved ? 'APPROVED' : 'DENIED',
approved,
votes,
yes_count: yes,
no_count: votes.length - yes,
quorum,
// Everything a reviewer needs to reproduce this outcome without running it.
basis: {
signal: report.signal,
headline: report.headline,
deterministic: true,
note: 'Each vote is a pure function of the constraint report and the operator\'s published sensitivities. Re-running with the same inputs yields the identical result.',
},
};
}
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
// Emergency path
// ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
/**
* Emergency override β the honest version.
*
* The old implementation set status APPROVED directly, with zero real votes,
* and fabricated unanimous YES from whichever nodes happened to be online. That
* contradicted the invariant formal/AstroMesh.tla proves:
*
* APPROVED => Cardinality(votes) >= Quorum
*
* An emergency is a reason to accept known risk faster. It is not a reason to
* skip the poll, and it is not a reason to cross a non-negotiable line.
*
* So: emergency generates automatic named waivers for the *waivable* hard rules
* that are currently violated, then re-evaluates and runs a real poll. If a
* non-negotiable rule is violated, it refuses β no override path exists.
*
* @returns {{allowed:boolean, waivers:Array, refused_by:Array, reason:string}}
*/
function emergencyWaivers(report, { party = 'EMERGENCY', reason = 'declared emergency', ts = null } = {}) {
const nonNegotiable = report.blocking.filter((r) => r.waivable === false);
if (nonNegotiable.length) {
return {
allowed: false,
waivers: [],
refused_by: nonNegotiable.map((r) => ({ id: r.id, title: r.title, detail: r.detail })),
reason: `Emergency override refused. ${nonNegotiable.length} non-negotiable rule${nonNegotiable.length > 1 ? 's are' : ' is'} violated: `
+ nonNegotiable.map((r) => `${r.id} ${r.title}`).join('; ')
+ '. These rules have no override path β not for an emergency, not for the leader, not for anyone.',
};
}
// Unevaluated rules cannot be waived either. An emergency does not create evidence.
if (report.unevaluated.length) {
return {
allowed: false,
waivers: [],
refused_by: report.unevaluated.map((r) => ({ id: r.id, title: r.title, detail: r.detail })),
reason: `Emergency override refused. ${report.unevaluated.length} rule${report.unevaluated.length > 1 ? 's have' : ' has'} not been evaluated: `
+ report.unevaluated.map((r) => `${r.id} ${r.title}`).join('; ')
+ '. An emergency is not evidence β obtain the missing inputs first.',
};
}
const waivers = report.blocking.map((r) => ({
rule_id: r.id, party, reason: `${reason} β auto-waived under emergency declaration`, ts,
}));
return {
allowed: true,
waivers,
refused_by: [],
reason: waivers.length
? `Emergency declared. ${waivers.length} waivable hard rule${waivers.length > 1 ? 's' : ''} auto-waived and recorded against ${party}. Quorum is still required.`
: 'Emergency declared. No hard rules were violated; the poll proceeds normally.',
};
}
module.exports = { nodeVote, poll, postures, emergencyWaivers, POSTURES };
|