Problem
Unsupported expansion
A proof about one scope, authority, evidence source, enforcement locus, or representation is reused as if it covered a wider system.
PerceptraAI Research
The Guard page shows a runtime boundary. This page points to the formal research record: DARM Core v1.0, a machine-checked calculus for boundary-indexed assurance transfer.
The paper
DARM Core separates assurance generation from assurance transfer. A theorem, contract, test, certificate, or assurance case may establish a source claim, but the target claim still needs a represented delta, boundary coverage, and discharge.
Problem
A proof about one scope, authority, evidence source, enforcement locus, or representation is reused as if it covered a wider system.
Object
DARM asks what changed between source and target, which dependencies were introduced, and whether the target boundary covers them.
Result
When source assurance and transfer admissibility hold, the target assurance claim becomes justified inside the model.
Calculus
The point is not that every true target claim must pass through DARM. The point is narrower and stronger: if a claim is being transported, DARM forces the introduced obligations into the open.
SourceAssured
∧ represented_delta(source, target)
∧ boundary_coverage(target, dependencies)
∧ discharge(target, dependencies)
⇒ TargetAssured
The Zenodo paper states this as an assurance-conservation discipline, supported by positive theorems, countermodels, localization results, and correspondence experiments.
What changes
Source claim
A proof, test, contract, assurance case, or certification supports a bounded claim.
Transfer delta
Scope, authority, locus, evidence, representation, composition, or relational structure changes.
Target claim
Without discharge, the source can remain true while the target claim is unsupported.
Research evidence
This page points readers to the formal side of PerceptraAI's DARM work. The Guard page remains the runtime evidence page.
250
Lean modules
DARM Monitor local corpus snapshot used across the evidence site.
1,629
Theorems and lemmas
Declarations indexed in the formal repository materials.
12
Paper pages
DARM Core v1.0 PDF confirmed from uploaded metadata.
0
Declared axioms
For the reported corpus snapshot; trusted bases are still named separately.
| Research object | Where to inspect | Boundary note |
|---|---|---|
| DARM Core v1.0 paper | Zenodo record 23214596 | Archived research record, not a claim that every runtime implementation is proved. |
| Formal repository | Goblohan/darm-monitor | Lean model and proof corpus. Deployment behavior requires separate bridging evidence. |
| Guard/runtime repository | Goblohan/Darm-Guard | Runtime boundary and test evidence live here; they are not the same artifact as DARM Core. |
| Evidence page | PerceptraAI DARM Evidence | Use this for Guard claims, workflow status, closure experiment, and implementation limits. |
Research position
The paper's narrow novelty claim is that assurance transfer itself becomes a first-class, backend-independent, boundary-indexed object.
Limits
The theory does not prove alignment, truthfulness, confidentiality, physical-world safety, or harm absence.
A Lean theorem about a model does not by itself prove a Python service, OS, filesystem, compiler, or hosted deployment.
The chosen boundary must observe the distinctions the claim depends on. If it cannot observe them, DARM should not pretend it can enforce them.
Research links