Research

Papers on how long evidence stays true, and what happens when systems act faster than they can check it.

The papers name the failure classes; the software carries the response. The Δt series is the scaffolding for the check-versus-action logic in standing and the admission checks in Constellation. Some of this work is theoretical only: not everything here has an implementation, and the papers are not evidence that anything is deployed.

Selected claims from the Δt series are machine-checked in Lean 4: unpingable/lean (proof reader’s portal). The theorems prove the boundaries of refusal classes, not that any deployed system is safe. A small separate family, design constraints, holds general results used to bound design claims — what a quantized score, a perturbation distance, a spend limit or a provenance chain can and cannot license. These are formal results used to constrain design claims; they are not a formal verification of Constellation or ABSD as whole systems.

Engineering and reliability work first, then the broader work. Every paper is listed. Sources and drafts: github.com/unpingable/papers · ORCID

Timing, verification and reliability

How long a check stays true, what happens when systems act faster than they can verify, and where that turns into faults.

AI systems and governed reasoning

The same timing and feedback questions applied to language models, reward, alignment and reasoning under explicit authority.

Institutions, media and society

Broader work using the same models on organisations, censorship, social media and propaganda.