open-standards/joule-code/joule-code-rs/crates/joule-code-remediate/examples/formal_fix.rs
Transaction Science b5cce1b398 joule-code-remediate: promote the formally-verified fix tier into run_once
The formal tier is now a live gate, not just an example. When a run carries
`<workspace>/.joule-fix/formal.json` (a domain JouleContract + the
Formalizations encoding the obligations the fix must honor), the harness
discharges them through the joulecontract→proof vericoding bridge over a real
z3, as a seventh gate `formal-proof`. A refuted or unproven obligation fails the
gate and reverts the fix exactly like a failed test — the rung above build+test.

  - Decision-procedure ladder only ([Propositional, Z3Smt]); a formal gate must
    not fall through to a model stand-in.
  - The spec is loaded + validated UP FRONT (indices, duplicates), before any
    edit, so a malformed spec fails on a clean tree rather than mid-run (which
    would otherwise leave the operational fix un-reverted).
  - Per-obligation discharge written to .joule-fix/formal-discharge.json as
    re-checkable evidence; proof joules reported (ModelBased, in-process) beside
    the cargo-attributed gate energy. No formal.json ⇒ no formal gate, run is
    identical to before.

Live, both directions, on real z3:
  - correct postcondition (net = debits - credits): formal-proof ✓ (proved by
    Smt, 0.10 J), all seven gates green, fix ships.
  - buggy postcondition (net = debits + credits): all six OPERATIONAL gates
    green, but formal-proof ✗ (1 refuted, counter-model debits=credits=1⇒net=2),
    fix REVERTED, refusal receipt. An operationally-valid lint fix refused
    because its formal claim was disproved.

Two harness tests (proven→ships, refuted→reverts), gated on z3 availability.
Example's soundness note updated (the proof crate now halts on refutation).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <[email protected]>
2026-06-13 01:39:32 -04:00

179 lines
8.2 KiB
Rust

//! The **formally-verified fix tier** — the verification rung past build+test.
//!
//! `joule-fix`'s `run_once` discharges six *operational* gates (build, tests,
//! lint-delta, frame, diff). They answer "did this change break anything we
//! tested?" — not "is this change *correct*?". For a fix whose correctness is a
//! formal property, there is a stronger gate, and every piece to run it already
//! ships in this monorepo:
//!
//! - `joulecontract-proof` — the vericoding bridge: a contract obligation that
//! carries a formalization becomes a content-addressed proof goal.
//! - `proof-solvers::real_ladder()` — a cheapest-sufficient cascade ending in
//! a **real `z3`** SMT backend (assert the negation; `unsat` ⇒ valid).
//! - the proof cascade meters every attempt in joules.
//!
//! This example wires them into a fix flow the harness does not yet run inline.
//! A settlement-netting function must satisfy one postcondition:
//!
//! when debits == credits, the net is zero.
//!
//! Two candidate fixes arrive. The proof — not a test suite — decides which one
//! is correct, and the buggy one is *refused before it can ship*:
//!
//! - candidate A (`net = debits + credits`): z3 finds a counter-model
//! (debits = credits = 1 ⇒ net = 2 ≠ 0) → **Unproved** → the formal gate
//! rejects the fix, with the wasted joules on record.
//! - candidate B (`net = debits - credits`): z3 finds the negation `unsat` →
//! the postcondition holds for *all* integers → **Proved** by the SMT rung,
//! measured joules sealed.
//!
//! That is the rigor nobody in the remediation market has reached: a fix gated
//! by a machine-checked proof of its own postcondition, priced in joules. It is
//! honest by construction — where `z3` is absent both candidates come back
//! Unproved (never a fabricated pass), and the unformalized obligations are
//! demoted, never dropped.
//!
//! Run with: `cargo run -p joule-code-remediate --example formal_fix`
use joulecontract_proof::{discharge, DischargeStatus, Formalization};
use joulecontract_schema::{Ceiling, Contract, ContentAddress, Rigor};
use proof_cascade::{ProofCache, Router};
use proof_schema::{GoalKind, SpecGrounding};
use proof_solvers::{z3_available, Propositional, Z3Smt};
// SOUNDNESS NOTE — why this example uses a decision-procedure ladder.
//
// This example originally exposed a soundness hole: against
// `proof_solvers::real_ladder()` = `[Propositional, Z3Smt, SmallModel,
// FrontierModel]`, candidate A (the bug) came back "PROVED by BigModel" at
// ~50 J. The cascade had no `Verdict::Refuted`, so `Z3Smt` collapsed z3's `sat`
// (a real counter-model) into `Unproved`; the router escalated it; and
// `FrontierModel` proves ANY goal unconditionally — so a disproof was
// fabricated into a proof.
//
// That is now fixed in the proof crate: `Verdict::Refuted` exists, `Z3Smt`
// emits it on `sat`, and the router HALTS on a refutation instead of escalating
// (regression test in proof-cascade). So `real_ladder()` no longer fabricates a
// proof of candidate A — it halts at `Z3Smt` with a refutation.
//
// We still use the decision-procedure ladder `[Propositional, Z3Smt]` here, on
// purpose: a formal *gate* must not depend on a model stand-in even for goals
// z3 returns `unknown` on (the stubs would still claim `proved` there). The
// gate's guarantee is "a decision procedure decided this", nothing weaker.
/// The contract over the netting function: one precondition, one postcondition
/// (the property the fix must honor), one frame. Same spec for both candidates
/// — only the fix's computed `net` differs.
fn netting_contract() -> Contract {
Contract {
joulecontract: "joulecontract/0.6".into(),
subject: "settlement netting — net(debits, credits)".into(),
rigor_target: Rigor::Jr2,
pre: vec!["debits and credits are integers".into()],
post: vec!["when debits == credits, the net is zero".into()],
inv: vec![],
frame: vec!["the settlement ledger row".into()],
ceiling: Ceiling {
enpi_joules: 10.0,
unit: "joules/settlement".into(),
enb_ref: ContentAddress::of_bytes(b"enb-settlement-2026"),
derivation: None,
},
sector_equivalence: None,
amends: None,
}
}
/// An SMT-LIB2 goal: the candidate's computed `net`, the premise `debits ==
/// credits`, and the **negation** of the postcondition. `unsat` ⇒ no
/// counter-model exists ⇒ the postcondition is a theorem for that candidate.
fn postcondition_goal(net_definition: &str) -> String {
format!(
"(declare-const debits Int)\n\
(declare-const credits Int)\n\
(declare-const net Int)\n\
(assert (= net {net_definition}))\n\
(assert (= debits credits))\n\
(assert (not (= net 0)))"
)
}
/// Discharge the post-condition (obligation index 1: pre=0, post=1, frame=2)
/// for one candidate fix, and report the verdict + measured joules.
fn judge(label: &str, net_definition: &str) -> bool {
let contract = netting_contract();
let formalization = Formalization {
obligation: 1, // the postcondition
statement: postcondition_goal(net_definition),
kind: GoalKind::Decidable,
grounding: SpecGrounding::CrossChecked,
};
// A fresh cascade + cache per candidate so the joules reported are this
// candidate's own proof work, not a cache hit from the other. The ladder is
// decision-procedures only (see the SOUNDNESS NOTE at the top) — a formal
// gate may not fall through to a model stand-in that fabricates a proof.
let router = Router::new(vec![Box::new(Propositional), Box::new(Z3Smt)]);
let mut cache = ProofCache::new();
let d = discharge(&contract, &[formalization], &router, &mut cache)
.expect("discharge runs (bookkeeping is well-formed)");
let entry = &d.entries[1];
println!("── candidate {label}: net = {net_definition}");
match &entry.status {
DischargeStatus::Proved(result) => {
println!(
" PROVED by {:?} — postcondition holds for all integers ({} µJ measured)",
result.closed_by, result.total_uj
);
println!(" → formal gate ACCEPTS this fix.");
true
}
DischargeStatus::Unproved(result) => {
println!(
" UNPROVED — z3 found a counter-model; the postcondition can fail ({} µJ measured)",
result.total_uj
);
println!(" → formal gate REFUSES this fix (it would be reverted, never shipped).");
false
}
DischargeStatus::Unformalized => {
println!(" UNFORMALIZED — no proof goal supplied (recorded, never dropped).");
false
}
}
}
fn main() {
println!("formally-verified fix tier — settlement netting postcondition\n");
println!("postcondition under proof: debits == credits ⇒ net == 0\n");
if !z3_available() {
println!(
"note: `z3` is not on PATH — both candidates will come back UNPROVED.\n\
That is the honesty rule, not a failure: the harness never fabricates\n\
a proof it could not run. Install z3 to see the SMT rung discharge.\n"
);
}
let buggy_ok = judge("A (the bug)", "(+ debits credits)");
println!();
let fixed_ok = judge("B (the fix)", "(- debits credits)");
println!("\n── verdict");
if z3_available() {
assert!(!buggy_ok, "the buggy candidate must NOT pass the formal gate");
assert!(fixed_ok, "the correct fix must pass the formal gate");
println!(
"the proof discriminated: candidate A refused, candidate B verified.\n\
the shipped fix is gated by a machine-checked proof of its postcondition —\n\
a rung above build+test, priced in measured joules. that is the tier the\n\
remediation market has not reached."
);
} else {
println!(
"z3 absent: both candidates Unproved (honest). the gate refused the bug AND\n\
the fix — refusing a correct fix you could not prove beats shipping an\n\
unproven one. with z3 present, candidate B verifies and candidate A is refused."
);
}
}