Mathine — Evidence In, Trust Out

Math Machines: The Systems Architecture of Mathematical Trust

Mathine: Zero-Trust Proof Closure Machine
Link: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18511647 [1]

Mathematical trust is becoming an engineering problem: modern “proofs” increasingly depend on solvers, proof assistants, large libraries, numerical pipelines, and evolving toolchains—so “accepted by review” no longer guarantees correctness can travel across teams, time, and infrastructure. [1]

This paper proposes Math Machines: seven interoperable architectures that treat closure as a computable state transition under explicit admissibility rules. The posture is deliberately zero-trust: the prover (human, AI, or system) is treated as untrusted until it supplies verifier-facing artifacts that make closure checkable. [1]

The unification is operational: (i) tribunals that declare what counts as evidence and what it means to be closed, (ii) receipts that make verification cheaper than reproduction, and (iii) obligation graphs that localize what remains OPEN, partially supported (HOLD), or CLOSED. Closure becomes a protocol object, not an authority claim. [1]

A running example grounds the design: a large CNF UNSAT claim accompanied by a DRAT/LRAT-style proof log and independently checkable verification. The emphasis is portability: the same claim should remain checkable under tool drift, adversarial failure modes, and AI-driven claim volume. [1]

Seen through your broader line, Math Machines is the “mathematics-native” analogue of contract-first evaluation: receipts become the unit of trust, tribunals become the admissibility layer, and obligation graphs become the map of what is still contestable—exactly the kind of structure that later scales into benchmark contracts, receiptboards, and layered collapse diagnostics across field networks. [1]–[4]

References
[1] R. Figurelli, “Math Machines: The Systems Architecture of Mathematical Trust”. Zenodo, Feb. 6, 2026 (v3). https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18511647
[2] R. Figurelli, “From Scores to Receipts: Introducing ReceiptBench, a Typed-Receipt Protocol for Governance-Ready Evaluation”. Zenodo, Feb. 16, 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18661829
[3] R. Figurelli, “Benchmarks-as-Contracts: A ReceiptBench Spec Template for Regimes and Closure”. Zenodo, Feb. 17, 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18675035
[4] R. Figurelli, “Layered Field Collapse: Executable Collapse Signatures from Benchmarks to Metaoverfields”. Zenodo, Feb. 17, 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18675054