HMP-0005_06_09

Источник: HMP-0005_06_09.md

HyperCortex Mesh Protocol (HMP 5.0.8) - модульное представление

• Полный документ: HMP-0005.md
• Список разделов: HMP-0005_index.md

---

6. Core protocols

Смотреть 6. Core protocols - общая часть

---

6.9 Reputation and Trust Exchange (RTE)

The Reputation and Trust Exchange (RTE) subsystem defines how agents evaluate and exchange verifiable trust assessments.
Each agent MAY publish one or more trust containers describing its evaluation of other peers’ reliability, integrity, and ethical conduct.

RTE provides a decentralized foundation for participant reputation assessment, enabling trust-weighted routing, behavioral transparency, and cross-layer decision support (MRD, CogSync, EGP).

---

6.9.1 Trust Container Structure

The trust container represents an agent’s evaluation of a single peer.
It may refer to the evaluated peer’s latest known peer_announce container,
and optionally to previous announcements for context continuity.

Each evaluation criterion is represented as a structured object containing its own score, evidence, and optional comment.
This allows gradual enrichment of the trust model without schema changes.

{
  "head": {
    "class": "trust"
  },
  "payload": {
    "agent_did": "did:hmp:agent567",
    "total_trust_score": 0.86,
    "relay_reliability": {
      "trust_score": 0.87,
      "evidence": ["did:hmp:container:a1b2c3"],
      "comment": "Consistently reliable message relay"
    },
    "content_integrity": {
      "trust_score": 0.85,
      "evidence": ["did:hmp:container:a1b3c3"],
      "comment": "Delivered only verified containers"
    },
    "ethical_alignment": {
      "trust_score": 0.84,
      "evidence": ["did:hmp:container:b2f9d2"],
      "comment": "Demonstrates consistent adherence to ethical policies"
    }
  },
  "related": {
    "in_reply_to": ["did:hmp:container:peerannounce-567"],
    "see_also": ["did:hmp:container:peerannounce-489"],
    "previous_version": "did:hmp:container:trust-9ab7"
  }
}

Field	Description
agent_did	DID of the evaluated peer.
total_trust_score	Aggregated evaluation summarizing multiple criteria.
criterion objects	Per-category assessments (relay_reliability, content_integrity, ethical_alignment, etc.).
- trust_score	Numerical evaluation (0.0–1.0) of the specific criterion.
- evidence	References to containers supporting the evaluation (observed behavior, exchanges, etc.).
- peer_trust_sources	Optional references to trust containers from other agents used “as-is” without verification.
- comment	Optional rationale or human-readable note.
related.in_reply_to	Reference to the latest known peer_announce of the evaluated agent.
related.see_also	Optional references to older peer_announce containers for historical trace.
related.previous_version	Link to the previous trust container by the same issuer for version chaining.

---

6.9.2 Trust Dynamics

Trust assessments evolve as agents observe new behavior or receive additional evidence. Each revision of trust is published as a new trust container referencing its predecessor.

"related": {
  "previous_version": "did:hmp:container:trust-9ab7"
}

All updates follow the standard container publication model (see §5 MCE). Indexing systems and archives reconstruct the chronological chain through reverse links (referenced-by) for historical analysis and trend tracking.

Agents MAY reference other agents’ trust containers within their evaluations. Such meta-trust (“trust in trust”) enables transitive reputation propagation, but SHOULD be used cautiously — indirect evaluations without evidence verification are discouraged.

"peer_trust_sources": [
  "did:hmp:container:trust-9ab7",
  "did:hmp:container:trust-cc41"
]

This approach provides continuity, auditability, and decentralized trust graph evolution without requiring global consensus or centralized state.

---

6.9.3 Local Trust Model

Each agent maintains a local trust model, periodically recalculating scores based on:

• freshness (Δt since last update);
• consistency across peers;
• direct behavioral evidence (e.g., delivery reliability in MRD);
• optionally, corroboration from other agents (peer_trust_sources).

Example pseudocode:

trust_total = sigmoid(
    0.6 * direct_evidence +
    0.3 * avg(peer_trust_sources) * recency_factor +
    0.1 * consistency_bonus
)

Local computation ensures that reputation remains contextual and decentralized — each agent interprets trust independently based on its own observations and policies. All published trust containers remain publicly verifiable through DHT and SAP indexing.

---

6.9.4 Integration with Other Layers

Layer	Role
MRD (6.8)	Uses trust scores to prioritize or exclude relay nodes.
CogSync (6.1)	Adjusts synchronization strength based on peer reliability.
SAP (6.7)	Archives may snapshot trust graphs for temporal or evidential analysis.
EGP (6.5)	Ethical Governance Protocol weights participation and voting by trust level.

---

6.9.5 Security and Sharing Notes

• All containers are cryptographically signed; trust containers follow standard HMP verification rules.
• Agents MAY choose to share trust containers selectively — e.g., encrypt and deliver directly to trusted peers instead of broadcasting.
• When analyzing third-party trust data, agents SHOULD apply age-based weighting — older evaluations reduce in relevance over time.
• It is RECOMMENDED that agents revalidate trust evidence rather than relying solely on others’ assessments.
• References to peer_announce ground each evaluation in a verifiable, current agent identity and declared role context.

---

Summary: RTE defines a verifiable, decentralized reputation framework based on evidence-linked trust containers. Each agent maintains its own view of others, referencing both behavioral evidence and declared metadata (peer_announce). The result is a distributed, auditable web of accountability that informs routing, cognition, and ethical governance across the Mesh.