Working Paper WP-006¶

Operationalising Graph Settlement: Simulation, Governance Stress Testing, and Deployment Framework¶

Working Paper WP-006
Status: Technical & Deployment Specification
Version: 1.0
Date: 2026

Abstract¶

WP-005 formalised the Six-Degree Network Ledger Architecture and Non-Monetary Complex Settlement (NMCS) as the structural evolution of CAN.

WP-006 operationalises that architecture by specifying:

Computational implementation of graph settlement
Weight decay and trust propagation models
Simulation framework for multi-hop coordination
Adversarial stress testing mechanisms
Governance cell deployment model
Phased real-world rollout strategy

Where WP-005 established structure, WP-006 establishes execution.

1. Objective¶

To demonstrate that:

Graph settlement is computationally feasible at scale
Trust propagation can be stabilised across large networks
NMCS remains robust under adversarial conditions
Hybrid transition can occur without institutional shock

2. Computational Model¶

2.1 Graph Definition¶

Let:

G(t) = (N, E, W(t))

Where: - N = participants - E = verified enablement edges - W(t) = time-dependent weights

Each edge may carry: contribution weight (c), reliability modifier (r), validation multiplier (v), and degree-distance decay (d^k).

2.2 Degree Decay¶

Impact decays over network distance to prevent permanent dominance and infinite accumulation.

Example options: - Exponential: d^k = e^(−λk) - Linear capped: d^k = max(0, 1 − αk) - Adaptive: d^k adjusted using path redundancy

3. Trust Computation¶

Trust(A → Z) is computed as an aggregate of validated paths weighted by: - path length (degree distance) - reliability persistence - governance validation - redundancy (multi-path confirmation)

Clique/collusion risks are mitigated via: - path diversity requirements - reinforcement caps - anomaly detection - random audits

4. Access Allocation Engine¶

Access priority is computed per resource pool as:

P(n, pool) = w1(C_direct) + w2(C_propagated) + w3(Trust) + w4(Reliability) + w5(Need) − w6(Overconcentration)

Weights are pool-specific and governance-controlled.

5. Simulation Framework¶

5.1 Baseline Network Simulation¶

Test 10^3–10^6 nodes with varying participation, validation strictness, and adversarial injection. Measure allocation variance, concentration drift, trust collapse thresholds, and recovery time.

5.2 Platform Topology Simulation (Creator → User → Advertiser → Platform)¶

Model A → Z (free informational provision), Z → Y (attention), Y → B (revenue). Replace central redistribution with NMCS propagation. Measure creator stability and dependency reduction on central payout.

5.3 Free-Rider Stress Test¶

Inject passive actors and observe trust decay, access tier pressure (without punitive deprivation), and stability under 5/10/20% passive rates.

6. Governance Cell Deployment¶

Cells manage: local validation, edge verification, appeals/disputes, and parameter tuning per pool.

Safeguards: rotation and term limits, cross-cell arbitration, and transparent audit trails.

7. Hybrid Deployment Strategy¶

Phased rollout: 1. Institutional pilots (bounded domains) 2. Multi-pool integration (cross-domain graph) 3. Monetary shrinkage (price mediation reduces where graph settlement performs)

Money remains a compliance interface where required.

8. Outcomes and Metrics¶

Empirical validation indicators: - concentration coefficient - trust dispersion index - allocation fairness variance - contributor retention - shock recovery time

9. Conclusion¶

WP-005 defined the architecture. WP-006 defines operationalisation.

Graph settlement is simulation-ready, governance-testable, and deployable in hybrid environments without requiring abrupt abolition of monetary systems.