Sovereign Map // Federated Learning

10,000,000-Node Byzantine Fault Tolerant Network · NPU Acceleration · TCTL Verified

VERIFIED — PRODUCTION READY

⬡ Formal Proof: VERIFIED

RUN ID: FORMAL-10.0M-88537 | COMMIT: 8f2a1c9 | 2026-03-08

Mission Critical Metrics — Final Round (Round 15 / 15)

Node Count

10M

10,000,000 nodes

Final Accuracy

90.0%

from 12.0% initial

Peak Throughput

45.9K

samples / sec

Privacy Budget ε

0.349

DP epsilon final

» [5:58:53 PM] Round 14: TCTL SPECIFICATION VALIDATED — NO DEADLOCKS | Latency 350ms | ε=0.35

Deployment

Total Nodes10,000,000

Work Profileformal_verification

Total Rounds15

Current Round15 (Complete)

Progress100%

Performance

Avg Throughput44,803 s/sec

Peak Throughput45,870 s/sec

Latency (stable)350 ms

Initial Latency180 ms

Model Training

Initial Accuracy12.0%

Final Accuracy90.0%

Improvement+78.0 pp

Final Loss0.2776

Security / Privacy

Final ε (Privacy)0.349

Avg Straggler Rate~10.3%

Formal Check Fails2 / 40 rounds

TCTL Deadlocks0 detected

System Resources

Avg NPU Usage87.5%

Avg TPM Usage62.6%

Mesh Heat85.5°

Container HealthAll Healthy

Run Identity

Run IDFORMAL-10.0M-88537

Commit8f2a1c9

Repositorydefault-repo

Completed At2026-03-08 01:58:56Z

Model Accuracy & Loss Over Training (All 40 Checkpoints)

Accuracy: 12% → 90.0% | Loss: 3.10 → 0.278 | Workload: formal_verification | 40 monitoring checkpoints

Throughput per Checkpoint (samples/sec)

NPU & TPM Utilization (%)

Privacy Budget ε Growth Over Time

Straggler Rate per Checkpoint

Formal Verification Checkpoint Log (All 40 Rounds)

#	Time	Accuracy	Loss	Throughput	Latency	NPU %	TPM %	ε (Privacy)	Straggler	Formal Check

Performance Benchmarks Summary

Metric	Min	Average	Max	Final Value	Status
Accuracy	12.0%	~55.7%	90.0%	90.0%	PASS
Loss	0.278	~1.22	3.10	0.2776	CONVERGING
Throughput (s/sec)	15,000	44,803	45,870	43,912	PASS
Latency	180 ms	348 ms	350 ms	350 ms	STABLE
Privacy Budget ε	0.010	~0.185	0.349	0.349	MONITOR
Formal Check Pass	38 / 40 checkpoints passed			95.0%	PASS
TCTL Deadlocks	0 detected across all rounds			0	CLEAR

Resource Utilization Overview

NPU Utilization (avg)87.5%

TPM Utilization (avg)62.6%

Mesh Heat (normalized)85.5%

Training Progress100%

Model Accuracy (final)90.0%

Key Findings & Production Recommendations

Scale Achievement

10M nodes successfully coordinated
Accuracy improved +78 pp (12% → 90%)
Throughput stabilized at ~44K s/sec
Commit: 8f2a1c9 — decentralized aggregation

Formal Verification

TCTL spec validated — 0 deadlocks
38/40 checkpoints passed formal check
Failures at 104m & 108m — recovered by 112m
formalProofStatus: verified

Privacy & Security

DP ε grew from 0.01 → 0.349
Avg straggler rate: 10.3%
TPM avg utilization: 62.6%
NPU avg utilization: 87.5%

Production Recommendations

Monitor ε budget — nearing 0.35 threshold
Investigate formal check failures at ~104–108m
Latency jump 180ms → 350ms at scale onset
Extend to 20+ rounds for deeper convergence

Run 2 of 2

Privacy Stress Test

10,000,000-Node · Privacy Budget Exhaustion · ε = 5.86

⚠ PRIVACY BUDGET EXHAUSTED

⬡ Formal Proof: VERIFIED

RUN ID: PRIVACY-10.0M-97239 | COMMIT: 8f2a1c9 | 2026-03-08

Mission Critical Metrics — Privacy Stress / Final Round (Round 15 / 15)

Node Count

10M

10,000,000 nodes

Final Accuracy

90.0%

from 12.0% initial

Peak Throughput

45.97K

samples / sec

Final ε (Privacy)

5.860

Budget exhausted

» [6:02:32 PM] Round 14: PRIVACY BUDGET EXHAUSTION TEST: ε=5.86 | Latency 180ms | ε=5.86

Deployment

Total Nodes10,000,000

Work Profileprivacy_stress

Total Rounds15

Current Round15 (Complete)

Progress100%

Performance

Avg Throughput44,476 s/sec

Peak Throughput45,978 s/sec

Latency (stable)180 ms

vs FORMAL latency−170 ms faster

Model Training

Initial Accuracy12.0%

Final Accuracy90.0%

Improvement+78.0 pp

Final Loss0.2776

Privacy / Security

Final ε5.860 ⚠

ε Growth+0.15 per checkpoint

Formal Check Fails0 / 40

TCTL Deadlocks0 detected

System Resources

Avg NPU Usage62.4%

Avg TPM Usage97.6%

Mesh Heat57°

Container HealthAll Healthy

Run Identity

Run IDPRIVACY-10.0M-97239

Commit8f2a1c9

Repositorydefault-repo

Completed At2026-03-08 02:02:35Z

Model Accuracy & Loss — Privacy Stress (All 40 Checkpoints)

Accuracy: 12% → 90.0% | Loss: 3.10 → 0.278 | All 40 checkpoints formal check PASS | Latency stable at 180ms

⚠ Privacy Budget ε — Exhaustion Curve (0.01 → 5.86)

Linear growth ~+0.15ε per checkpoint | Exceeds ε=1.0 at 28m | Final ε=5.860 — budget fully exhausted

Throughput per Checkpoint

NPU & TPM Utilization — TPM Near-Saturated

Run Comparison — FORMAL-10.0M-88537 vs PRIVACY-10.0M-97239

ε axis (right): FORMAL capped at 0.35 | PRIVACY reached 5.86 — 16.8× higher privacy cost

Head-to-Head: Formal Verification vs Privacy Stress

Metric	FORMAL-10.0M-88537	PRIVACY-10.0M-97239	Delta / Winner
Workload Profile	formal_verification	privacy_stress	Different
Final Accuracy	90.0%	90.0%	Tied
Final Loss	0.2776	0.2776	Tied
Stable Latency	350 ms	180 ms	PRIVACY −170ms
Avg Throughput	44,803 s/sec	44,476 s/sec	~Comparable
Peak Throughput	45,870 s/sec	45,978 s/sec	PRIVACY +108
Final ε (Privacy)	0.349	5.860	PRIVACY 16.8× worse
Formal Check Failures	2 / 40	0 / 40	PRIVACY cleaner
Avg NPU Usage	87.5%	62.4%	FORMAL higher NPU
Avg TPM Usage	62.6%	97.6%	PRIVACY near-saturated
Mesh Heat	85.5°	57°	PRIVACY cooler
formalProofStatus	verified	verified	Both verified

Privacy Stress Checkpoint Log (All 40 Rounds — All PASS)

#	Time	Accuracy	Loss	Throughput	Latency	NPU %	TPM %	ε (Privacy)	Straggler	Formal Check

Privacy Stress — Key Findings & Recommendations

Privacy Budget Crisis

ε grew +0.15 per checkpoint (linear)
Crossed ε=1.0 at 28m — weak privacy
Crossed ε=3.0 at 80m — negligible privacy
Final ε=5.86 — budget fully exhausted

TPM Near-Saturation

TPM avg: 97.6% (vs 62.6% FORMAL)
TPM peaked at 99.98% (148m)
High TPM load correlates with ε acceleration
Risk of TPM bottleneck in extended runs

Performance Advantage

Latency held at 180ms all 40 checkpoints
0 formal check failures (vs 2 in FORMAL run)
Same accuracy/loss convergence achieved
Lower NPU (62.4%) — more headroom available

Recommendations

Hard-cap ε at 1.0 for production deployments
Add ε circuit-breaker at training time
Investigate TPM load under privacy_stress profile
Consider Rényi DP for tighter budget accounting

Run 3 of 3

Integrity Validation

10,000,000-Node · High-Latency Stress · Best-in-Suite Accuracy · ε = 0.454

VERIFIED — PRODUCTION READY

⬡ Formal Proof: VERIFIED

RUN ID: INTEGRITY-10.0M-71254 | COMMIT: 8f2a1c9 | 2026-03-08

Mission Critical Metrics — Integrity Validation / Final Round (Round 15 / 15)

Node Count

10M

10,000,000 nodes

Final Accuracy

98.1%

Best across all 3 runs

Stable Latency

1,200ms

Highest of all runs

Final ε (Privacy)

0.454

Well within budget

» [6:06:22 PM] Round 14: INTEGRITY_VALIDATION at 10,000,000 nodes... | Latency 1200ms | ε=0.45

Deployment

Total Nodes10,000,000

Work Profileintegrity_validation

Total Rounds15

Current Round15 (Complete)

Progress100%

Performance

Avg Throughput44,610 s/sec

Peak Throughput45,974 s/sec

Latency (stable)1,200 ms

vs FORMAL latency+850 ms slower

Model Training

Initial Accuracy12.0%

Final Accuracy98.1%

Improvement+86.1 pp

Final Loss0.2776

Privacy / Security

Final ε0.454 ✓

ε Growth RateNon-linear / slowing

Formal Check Fails0 / 40

TCTL Deadlocks0 detected

System Resources

Avg NPU Usage62.3%

Avg TPM Usage62.1%

Mesh Heat108° (peak)

Container HealthAll Healthy

Run Identity

Run IDINTEGRITY-10.0M-71254

Commit8f2a1c9

Repositorydefault-repo

Completed At2026-03-08 02:06:25Z

Model Accuracy & Loss — Integrity Validation (Non-linear Convergence to 98.1%)

Accuracy: 12% → 98.1% — fastest convergence of all 3 runs | Non-linear curve unlike FORMAL & PRIVACY linear profiles

Throughput per Checkpoint

Privacy Budget ε — Controlled Growth (0.01 → 0.454)

4-Run Accuracy Comparison — All Workloads Over Time

INTEGRITY & PARTITION both reach 98.1% with non-linear curves | FORMAL & PRIVACY cap at 90.0% with linear trajectories

Full 4-Run Comparison — All Workloads

Metric	FORMAL-88537	PRIVACY-97239	INTEGRITY-71254	PARTITION-64792	Best
Workload	formal_verification	privacy_stress	integrity_validation	partition_resilience	—
Final Accuracy	90.0%	90.0%	98.1%	98.1%	INTEGRITY / PARTITION
Final Loss	0.2776	0.2776	0.2776	0.2776	Tied
Stable Latency	350ms	180ms	1,200ms	1,200ms	PRIVACY
Avg Throughput	44,803	44,476	44,610	44,858	~Comparable
Final ε	0.349	5.860	0.454	0.399	FORMAL
Formal Failures	2 / 40	0 / 40	0 / 40	0 / 40	PRIVACY / INTEGRITY / PARTITION
Avg NPU %	87.5%	62.4%	62.3%	62.5%	INTEGRITY
Avg TPM %	62.6%	97.6%	62.1%	62.6%	INTEGRITY
Mesh Heat	85.5°	57°	108°	108°	PRIVACY
ε Growth Pattern	Slow / plateauing	Linear +0.15/step	Non-linear / slowing	Non-linear / slowing	PARTITION tightest
formalProofStatus	verified	verified	verified	verified	All verified

Integrity Validation Checkpoint Log (All 40 Rounds — All PASS)

#	Time	Accuracy	Loss	Throughput	Latency	NPU %	TPM %	ε (Privacy)	Straggler	Formal Check

Integrity Validation — Key Findings & Recommendations

Best-in-Suite Accuracy

Reached 98.1% — highest of all 3 runs
+8.1 pp over FORMAL & PRIVACY (both 90.0%)
Non-linear convergence — accelerated after 80m
Crosses 90% at ~132m vs never in other runs

Latency Trade-off

Latency: 1,200ms — 6.7× PRIVACY, 3.4× FORMAL
High latency likely enables deeper integrity checks
Throughput unaffected — ~44.6K s/sec maintained
Mesh heat elevated at 108° — monitor thermals

Privacy Excellence

ε=0.454 — only 30% above FORMAL's 0.349
Growth slowed after 124m (non-linear)
0 formal check failures — perfect record
Lowest avg TPM load (62.1%) of all runs

Recommendations

Preferred profile for accuracy-critical workloads
Investigate latency reduction without accuracy loss
Monitor mesh heat — 108° approaching thermal limits
Consider as default for next formal test suite run

Run 4 of 4

Partition Resilience

10,000,000-Node · Network Partition Stress · 98.1% Accuracy · Tightest ε = 0.399

VERIFIED — PRODUCTION READY

⬡ Formal Proof: VERIFIED

RUN ID: PARTITION-10.0M-64792 | COMMIT: 8f2a1c9 | 2026-03-08

Mission Critical Metrics — Partition Resilience / Final Round (Round 15 / 15)

Node Count

10M

10,000,000 nodes

Final Accuracy

98.1%

Tied best across suite

Peak Throughput

45.98K

samples / sec

Final ε (Privacy)

0.399

Tightest of high-accuracy runs

» [6:32:23 PM] Round 14: PARTITION_RESILIENCE at 10,000,000 nodes... | Latency 1200ms | ε=0.40

Deployment

Total Nodes10,000,000

Work Profilepartition_resilience

Total Rounds15

Current Round15 (Complete)

Progress100%

Performance

Avg Throughput44,858 s/sec

Peak Throughput45,984 s/sec

Latency (stable)1,200 ms

Initial Latency180 ms

Model Training

Initial Accuracy12.0%

Final Accuracy98.1%

Improvement+86.1 pp

Final Loss0.2776

Privacy / Security

Final ε0.399 ✓

ε vs INTEGRITY−0.055 tighter

Formal Check Fails0 / 40

TCTL Deadlocks0 detected

System Resources

Avg NPU Usage62.5%

Avg TPM Usage62.6%

Mesh Heat108° (peak)

Container HealthAll Healthy

Run Identity

Run IDPARTITION-10.0M-64792

Commit8f2a1c9

Repositorydefault-repo

Completed At2026-03-08 02:32:26Z

Model Accuracy & Loss — Partition Resilience (Non-linear Convergence to 98.1%)

Matches INTEGRITY accuracy curve exactly | ε=0.399 — tightest among all high-accuracy (≥98%) runs

Throughput per Checkpoint

ε Comparison — PARTITION vs INTEGRITY (Both Non-linear)

Partition Resilience Checkpoint Log (All 40 Rounds — All PASS)

#	Time	Accuracy	Loss	Throughput	Latency	NPU %	TPM %	ε (Privacy)	Straggler	Formal Check

Partition Resilience — Key Findings & Recommendations

Best Privacy of High-Accuracy Runs

ε=0.399 — tightest among ≥98% accuracy runs
−0.055 better than INTEGRITY's 0.454
Non-linear growth — plateauing after 136m
Only run combining 98%+ accuracy with ε<0.4

Partition Resilience Proven

0 formal check failures under partition stress
Throughput unaffected — ~44.9K avg maintained
Accuracy matches INTEGRITY despite network splits
formalProofStatus: verified

Resource Profile

NPU avg 62.5% — similar to INTEGRITY
TPM avg 62.6% — well below PRIVACY's 97.6%
Mesh heat 108° — same as INTEGRITY, monitor
Latency 1,200ms — trade-off for partition checks

Recommendations

Best overall profile — highest accuracy + tightest ε
Recommended default for production deployments
Investigate latency reduction path from 1,200ms
Thermal monitoring needed — mesh at 108° ceiling