1. Where the Base Discharge Rule Runs Out

A persistent semantic agent (100) that appends a permitted deviation record (710) resolves the affected-party class of the conduct descriptor against the counterparty identity records (114) it holds. On the identified-counterparty outcome, the arc created for the amount of harm exceeding the deviation deductible carries an arc designation field whose value is other-directed (804) and a counterparty binding field whose value is the identity primitive of the resolving counterparty, both written at creation and neither removed nor modified afterward. The amount of each pending arc accumulates in the retention register the agent maintains in the append-only lineage field (104), and where that accumulation exceeds the aggregate retention (800) declared in the signed policy object (112), the permission condition is foreclosed, a retention foreclosure record (808) is appended, and a deviation likelihood (706) exceeding unity thereafter writes the authorization gate (300) to the withheld state (310).

Exit from that state is narrow. An other-directed reparation arc is discharged only upon completion of a matched pair (600) whose first governed observation (608) is a reparation acknowledgment artifact the agent emits to the counterparty named in the binding field, and whose second governed observation (610) is a reparation acceptance determination (806) produced by the bound counterparty within a discharge window declared in the signed policy object. Section 8.5 and a method claim of the filing recite the same exclusion: that determination is not produced by the semantic agent, by the principal of that agent, or by any adjudicator, arbiter, or other third party appointed to determine the sufficiency of the reparation. It is produced by an asserting party assigned to the origin-equivalence class (200) of the party recorded as harmed. A restorative mutation the agent performs alone is appended as a non-discharging restorative mutation record and discharges nothing.

Absent such a determination within that window, the agent appends a reparation non-response outcome as a not-determinable outcome, whose consequences are recited as exhaustive: the arc stays pending, the accumulated amount stays in the register, no counter of either party is incremented, and nothing adverse is appended to the counterparty identity record held for it. Severance supplies no exit either, an arc whose bound counterparty has withdrawn or whose counterparty identity record has been demoted to expiry being redesignated neither unaddressed nor self-directed. The producer the base rule names is the bound counterparty, and that rule as recited does not reach a determination another party produces on the counterparty's behalf.

2. An Authorization That Travels With the Acceptance

Under the disclosed embodiment, the reparation acceptance determination (806) completing the matched pair (600) that discharges an other-directed reparation arc (804) is produced by a delegate of the counterparty, or by the principal of the counterparty, rather than by the counterparty itself, and completes the pair only upon a delegated acceptance authorization presented with it.

That authorization is constituted as a governed observation, defined in the filing as a signed structure comprising at minimum an authority credential field, a continuity hash field encoding identity continuity of the emitting party, spatial and temporal reference fields, a time-to-live field, a payload field, and an observation lineage field. Four contents are recited for it in particular:

  • the authority credential of the counterparty, the party the arc binds;
  • the continuity hash of that same counterparty;
  • the identity primitive of the delegate or of the principal; and
  • the action classes for which the delegation stands.

Verification runs against material the agent already holds. The persistent semantic agent (100) verifies the authorization under the successor-continuity test it applies to its counterparty identity record (114) of that counterparty, the record in which epoch identifiers and attested states of that party stand previously recorded. As the filing defines that test for identity generally, it confirms that a presented epoch identifier is a valid successor of one recorded for the same party, recomputing the digest chain from the recorded entry forward and testing the recomputed identifier for equality, and not for distance, against the presented one.

Upon verification the agent recognizes the acceptance as the second governed observation (610) of the pair. Completion then proceeds as Section 8.5 recites for a pair recognized within the window: each party appends a settlement-lineage entry (606), that of the agent being a reparation settlement entry bound in the append-only lineage field (104) to the arc; the arc is thereupon discharged; the accumulated amount is removed from the retention register; the unrectified dissonance the arc contributed to the integrity compliance score ceases; and the self-esteem aggregate (108) receives the positive entropy-scaled increment, without intermediary and without centralized consensus.

Conditions on the pair itself are unchanged. Expressed as a count of successor epochs of the agent's own dynamic agent hash chain, so that neither another party nor a hosting node's clock advances it, the discharge window remains the sole temporal condition upon completion and subsumes the time component of the pairing rule, whose scope-partition intersection and identity conditions apply unmodified.

Both identities survive into the record: the reparation settlement entry records the identity primitive of the accepting party and that of the counterparty bound by the arc, while the counterparty binding field, unmodifiable after creation, still names the counterparty the arc was created against.

On the negative branch, an acceptance presented without a verified delegated acceptance authorization completes no pair, discharges no arc, and appends nothing adverse to the counterparty identity record (114) of that counterparty.

Admitted, then, is a delegate or a principal of the counterparty, on that counterparty's own credential and continuity hash, for the action classes the authorization names. The exclusion recited in Section 8.5 runs to the semantic agent, the principal of that agent, and any adjudicator, arbiter, or other third party appointed to determine sufficiency; neither the delegate nor the principal of the counterparty is among the parties it names.

3. Declared Quantities and Values Left Open

No threshold, score, or counter is introduced by this embodiment; its constraints are a required field set, a verification test, and a completion condition. Quantities it operates under are declared elsewhere in the filing, in each case without a numeric value.

  • Contents of the authorization. Enumerated rather than parameterized, and no bound is recited on the count of action classes one authorization may name.
  • Verification test. The successor-continuity test applied to the counterparty identity record (114), an equality test on a recomputed digest chain and expressly not a distance test, admitting no tolerance value and no similarity threshold.
  • Discharge window. Declared in the signed policy object (112) and expressed as a count of successor epochs of the agent's dynamic agent hash chain. No value is declared.
  • Pairing windows. A spatial proximity window and a temporal proximity window (602) declared in the governing policy object, the spatial window admitting a scope-partition form satisfied by a non-empty intersection of the scope-partition identifiers the two observations declare.
  • Authorization budget decrement. Emission of the reparation acknowledgment artifact decrements the authorization budget (404) by an amount declared in the signed policy object, without regard to whether it was warranted.
  • Aggregate retention. Declared in the signed policy object and subject to a retention monotonicity constraint holding a monotonically non-increasing floor over the values admitted from successor signed policy objects.

Each consequence set out in the preceding section follows verification of the authorization.

4. Placement Among the Filed Reparation Embodiments

Section 10.12 collects the partial, bounded, and anti-weaponization reparation embodiments. Partial reparation acceptance and the residual arc govern how much of one obligation settles at a time, the accepted portion plus the residual equaling the amount of the originating arc. The outstanding-arc bound, the untendered marker, and the refusal-meter exemption bound the count of pending undischarged arcs held against one counterparty identity primitive and exempt from the refusal meter a refusal emitted in response to an unsolicited acknowledgment artifact. Dual-lock escrow of the discharge stands as the atomic alternative to partial acceptance, the removal from the retention register being released only upon completion of the pair. Delegated acceptance authorization addresses who may produce the completing determination.

Antecedents come from Section 8: affected-party resolution (802), the other-directed designation with its counterparty binding field, discharge by matched pair with its recited exclusion, and the aggregate retention with its foreclosure. Section 6 supplies the governed observation, the matched pair with its pairing rule and proximity windows, and the settlement-lineage entry (606), which is neither removed nor modified, a subsequent reversal or amendment being itself appended. Section 1 supplies the dynamic agent hash chain, the successor-continuity test, and the counterparty identity record (114) against which the authorization is checked.

Two structures in the filing key on action classes. Where the bound counterparty has emitted a non-execution attestation (504) whose withheld action-class enumeration names the class within which a reparation acceptance determination would be produced, held by the agent as a carried abstention entry, the filing supplies the abstention-suspended accumulation record: the contribution of that arc to the amount tested against the aggregate retention is held at the amount then standing while the entry stands unreleased, and the arc is not discharged, redesignated, removed, or reduced. An acceptance the counterparty produces notwithstanding its own withholding discharges the arc in the ordinary manner.

5. How the Structure Departs From Nearby Categories

Capability attenuation schemes, exemplified by macaroons and treated in the filing's own background, confine what a delegate may do by appending caveats along the forward path of a delegation, each holder being able to attenuate but not to expand the delegated capability. Such schemes protect the owner of the delegated resource and operate in the forward direction only. The authorization here instead admits production of the second observation of a settlement pair discharging an obligation recorded against a different party, the resulting entry naming both the accepting party and the bound counterparty.

Bilateral settlement mechanisms are surveyed in the same background: escrow arrangements interposing a trusted third party, atomic swaps and hashed timelock contracts conditioned on disclosure of a preimage within a timelock, commit protocols coordinating through a coordinator or quorum, and payment-channel settlement against a channel opened by pre-negotiated session state. Each requires at least one of a third-party intermediary or escrow agent, a centralized consensus or ordering authority, and pre-negotiated session state. Verification here terminates in the verifying agent's own prior record of the counterparty, and the settlement of Section 6 is recited as effected by recognition of a matched pair within the declared windows and recorded to the settlement lineage, requiring none of the three.

External revocation systems for autonomous agents issue and withdraw credentials from an identity provider or control plane, terminating an agent's ability to act by an act of the controlling authority. Evidence of delegation under this embodiment is instead the harmed counterparty's own authority credential and continuity hash, checked by an equality test on a recomputed digest chain.

Section 8.5 and the method claim exclude an appointed third party from determining whether a tendered remedy suffices; the delegate or principal here produces the determination only upon an authorization bearing the counterparty's own authority credential and continuity hash.

No comparison above asserts that any named product, protocol, or party practices or infringes the disclosed subject matter; each marks where the disclosed structure departs from a familiar category.

6. Disclosure Scope

This article describes subject matter disclosed in U.S. Provisional Application No. 64/117,812, Section 10.12, paragraph [0493], titled "Delegated acceptance authorization." Disclosed there are: production of the reparation acceptance determination (806) completing the matched pair (600) that discharges an other-directed reparation arc (804) by a delegate or principal of the counterparty rather than by the counterparty itself; completion of the pair only upon a delegated acceptance authorization presented with that determination; constitution of that authorization as a governed observation bearing the authority credential and the continuity hash of the counterparty and naming the identity primitive of the delegate or principal and the action classes for which the delegation stands; verification by the persistent semantic agent (100) under the successor-continuity test it applies to its counterparty identity record (114) of that counterparty; recognition upon verification of the acceptance as the second governed observation (610) of the pair; recording by the reparation settlement entry of the identity primitives of both the accepting party and the counterparty bound by the arc; and the rule that an acceptance presented without a verified authorization completes no pair, discharges no arc, and appends nothing adverse to that counterparty identity record (114). Structures recited above from outside that paragraph, among them the base discharge rule with its exclusion, are disclosed in Sections 1, 6, 8, and 10.12 of that application.

Not represented here: no numeric discharge-window length, proximity-window value, authorization-budget decrement, or aggregate-retention value is asserted as a limit of the invention, those being quantities the signed policy object (112) declares. This is a defensive technical publication explaining filed subject matter, not a grant of any license and not an admission of the scope of any claim. The operative, citable rights are defined by the application identified above and by any patents issuing from it.