🤖 AI Summary
This work addresses the lack of experimental non-repudiation in computer science conferences—where authors may retroactively alter or disavow reported results—by formally defining the problem, articulating corresponding security properties and a threat model, and advocating for its adoption as a first-class submission requirement. We propose a cryptographic compliance protocol that cryptographically binds experimental data to the actual computation process, and implement K-Veritas, a reference system in Go that generates verifiable, tamper-proof experimental reports without requiring access to the original training data. Our approach demonstrates the technical feasibility of enforcing experimental non-repudiation and lays the groundwork for an open, independent framework for standardized verification of computational research claims.
📝 Abstract
This position paper argues that computer science conferences should require tamper-evident, nonrepudiable attestations of experimental results. We name the underlying problem experiment nonrepudiation: a compliant protocol must bind the numbers in a paper to an actual executed computation in a way the author cannot later alter or deny. The current system relies on self-reported checklists, optional code sharing, and author-controlled logging. None of these mechanisms answer the question a reviewer cannot check: did the code the paper describes produce the numbers the paper reports? We define the problem formally, state the security properties any compliant protocol must satisfy, and describe a threat model that includes attacks current approaches do not prevent. To show that the problem is solvable, we built K-Veritas, a reference implementation in Go that produces signed reports without accessing training data. K-Veritas is a testbed, not a finished answer. We call on conferences and the community to treat nonrepudiation as a first-class requirement and to help build an open, independent standard for it.