feat: paper — unified mining: puzzle IS the knowledge

Signal proof already exercises all 4 GFP primitives (fma, ntt, p2r, lut)
in production proportions. Replace synthetic benchmark with real signal
proof + difficulty target. One proof → three rewards: block subsidy (PoW),
Δπ (knowledge), fees (services).

Miner incentive aligns with knowledge quality: same PoW cost per proof,
but higher Δπ = more reward. Every joule produces both security and
intelligence. The flywheel gains a third spoke.

First PoW scheme where puzzle output IS the protocol's primary product.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

Author: mastercyb

root/cyber/research/unified mining.md

@@ -0,0 +1,196 @@
+---
+tags: cyber, research, article, core
+crystal-type: article
+crystal-domain: cyber
+date: 2026-03-23
+---
+
+# unified mining: when the puzzle IS the knowledge
+
+## two mining mechanisms, one system
+
+[[cyber]] has two reward mechanisms:
+
+1. Δπ mining: a [[neuron]] creates [[cyberlinks]], computes the local tri-kernel impulse $\pi_\Delta$, proves it correct ([[zheng]] proof σ), submits as [[signal]]. reward ∝ proven Δπ. the neuron mints [[$CYB]] proportional to how much it shifted [[focus]].
+
+2. [[Goldilocks field processor|GFP]] PoUW mining: a miner produces a [[stark]] proof of a benchmark circuit exercising all four GFP primitives (fma, ntt, p2r, lut). reward = block subsidy. the puzzle trains hardware that serves the network.
+
+currently they are separate: Δπ mining rewards knowledge, PoUW mining rewards computation. the flywheel connects them economically (mining funds chip development, chips accelerate proving, proving serves users). but the WORK is different — PoUW proves a synthetic benchmark, not real knowledge.
+
+## the unification
+
+what if the PoUW puzzle IS the signal proof?
+
+a signal proof σ already exercises all four GFP primitives:
+
+| phase of signal proof | GFP primitive | % of constraints | what it does |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| tri-kernel impulse computation (SpMV) | fma | ~40% | matrix-vector for D, S, H operators |
+| polynomial state reads (algebraic NMT) | ntt | ~30% | PCS evaluation + commitment |
+| content addressing + Fiat-Shamir | p2r | ~20% | Hemera permutations |
+| conviction + activation functions | lut | ~10% | threshold checks, nonlinear ops |
+
+the signal proof IS a benchmark that exercises all four primitives in production proportions. it is not a synthetic circuit — it is the actual computation the network needs.
+
+## how it works
+
+```
+CURRENT (separate):
+  miner:   prove benchmark B(challenge, nonce) → block reward
+  neuron:  prove signal s = (ν, l⃗, π_Δ, σ) → Δπ reward
+  two separate computations, two separate reward streams
+
+UNIFIED:
+  miner-neuron: prove signal with difficulty target
+    signal proof σ must satisfy:
+      1. all cyberlinks valid (correctness)
+      2. π_Δ impulse correct (tri-kernel recomputation)
+      3. H(σ) < target (difficulty, partial preimage)
+
+  one computation → two rewards:
+    - Δπ reward for knowledge contribution (proportional to focus shift)
+    - block reward for proof-of-work (proportional to difficulty met)
+```
+
+the difficulty target serves sybil resistance. the Δπ serves knowledge incentive. same proof, two functions.
+
+## the mechanism
+
+### signal-as-puzzle
+
+a miner-neuron:
+
+1. selects cyberlinks to include (the knowledge contribution)
+2. computes tri-kernel impulse π_Δ (the local recomputation)
+3. generates zheng proof σ (exercises all 4 GFP primitives)
+4. checks if H(σ) < target (difficulty)
+5. if yes: submit signal. earn block reward + Δπ reward
+6. if no: adjust nonce field in signal, reprove
+
+the nonce is embedded in the signal structure — a field that can be freely varied without changing the semantic content. each nonce produces a different σ (different zheng randomness → different proof → different hash). the miner searches for a σ whose hash meets the target.
+
+### why this works
+
+the signal proof ALREADY contains:
+
+- fma: sparse matrix-vector multiply for tri-kernel (real work, not synthetic)
+- ntt: polynomial commitment for algebraic NMT state reads (real work)
+- p2r: Hemera hashing for content identity and Fiat-Shamir (real work)
+- lut: activation functions and threshold checks (real work)
+
+the benchmark circuit in the current GFP spec simulates these exact operations with fake data. unified mining replaces fake data with real data. the GFP optimization target does not change — the same chip that mines the synthetic benchmark mines real signals with the same performance characteristics.
+
+### difficulty adjustment
+
+block reward target adjusts like Bitcoin: maintain average block time by scaling target. higher hash rate → lower target → harder to find qualifying σ.
+
+Δπ reward is independent of difficulty: the neuron earns Δπ regardless of whether σ also meets the difficulty target. but only signals that meet difficulty qualify for block reward.
+
+this means:
+- small neurons (phone, laptop): earn Δπ rewards for knowledge. never meet block difficulty. this is fine — knowledge mining is accessible to everyone
+- large miners (GFP cluster): earn Δπ + block rewards. optimize for both knowledge quality (higher Δπ) and hash rate (more attempts per second)
+- the incentive: a miner who selects BETTER cyberlinks earns MORE Δπ per proof, making each mining attempt more valuable. knowledge quality improves hash revenue
+
+### the flywheel tightens
+
+```
+CURRENT FLYWHEEL:
+  mining rewards → fund GFP development
+  GFP accelerates proving → proving serves users
+  users pay fees → fees fund network
+
+UNIFIED FLYWHEEL:
+  mining rewards → fund GFP development
+  GFP accelerates SIGNAL PROVING → signals ARE knowledge
+  better hardware → more signals per second → more knowledge per second
+  more knowledge → higher Δπ → more reward → more investment in GFP
+  same chip. same operation. THREE revenue streams:
+    1. block reward (PoW)
+    2. Δπ reward (knowledge)
+    3. user fees (services)
+```
+
+the flywheel gains a third spoke. GFP development is funded by mining. mining produces knowledge. knowledge generates fees. fees fund more GFP. the loop has no synthetic step — every cycle produces real value.
+
+## economic alignment
+
+### miner incentive to create good cyberlinks
+
+a miner who submits garbage cyberlinks:
+- low Δπ → low Δπ reward
+- same hash difficulty → same PoW cost
+- net: wastes energy on low-value proofs
+
+a miner who submits high-quality cyberlinks:
+- high Δπ → high Δπ reward
+- same hash difficulty → same PoW cost
+- net: earns more per proof
+
+the incentive gradient points toward knowledge quality. mining energy goes to proving USEFUL signals, not synthetic benchmarks. every joule produces both security (PoW) and intelligence (Δπ).
+
+### hardware alignment
+
+the GFP chip optimized for mining is optimized for:
+- tri-kernel computation (fma) — the intelligence
+- polynomial state reads (ntt) — the authentication
+- content addressing (p2r) — the identity
+- activation functions (lut) — the nonlinearity
+
+there is no divergence between mining hardware and utility hardware. the miner's chip IS the validator's chip IS the neuron's chip. one chip design, one optimization target, one market.
+
+### comparison with other PoW systems
+
+| system | puzzle | useful? | hardware reuse |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| Bitcoin | SHA-256 preimage | no | ASICs are single-purpose |
+| Ethereum (PoS) | no puzzle | N/A | staking capital, not compute |
+| Filecoin | storage proofs | partially (stores data) | storage hardware reusable |
+| cyber (benchmark PoUW) | synthetic stark proof | partially (trains hardware) | GFP serves network |
+| cyber (unified mining) | real signal proof | yes (IS knowledge) | GFP IS the intelligence |
+
+unified mining is the first scheme where the puzzle output IS the protocol's primary product. not a side effect. not a secondary benefit. the proof that secures the network IS the proof that creates knowledge.
+
+## technical requirements
+
+### signal nonce field
+
+add a 2-element nonce field to the signal structure:
+
+$$s = (\nu, \vec\ell, \pi_\Delta, \sigma, \text{prev}, \text{mc}, \text{vdf}, \text{step}, \textbf{nonce})$$
+
+the nonce does not affect signal semantics (same cyberlinks, same π_Δ). it only affects the zheng proof randomness → different σ → different H(σ). this is the search space for miners.
+
+### proof binding
+
+the zheng proof σ must commit to the nonce before Fiat-Shamir challenges are squeezed. this ensures each nonce produces a genuinely different proof — miners cannot reuse proof internals across nonce attempts.
+
+### block structure
+
+a block is a set of signals whose proofs collectively meet the difficulty target:
+
+```
+block:
+  signals: [s₁, s₂, ..., sₖ]
+  aggregate_hash: H(σ₁ ‖ σ₂ ‖ ... ‖ σₖ) < target
+
+  validity: each sᵢ has valid zheng proof σᵢ
+  difficulty: aggregate hash below target
+  reward: block_subsidy + Σ Δπ(sᵢ)
+```
+
+multiple signals per block means miners can aggregate knowledge from multiple neurons. a miner-pool collects signals from many neurons, proves them all, and splits rewards.
+
+## what changes
+
+the GFP page describes the benchmark circuit as four phases mimicking real workloads. unified mining removes the mimicry. the phases ARE the workloads:
+
+| GFP benchmark phase | unified mining equivalent |
+|---|---|
+| Phase 1: matrix-vector (fma) | tri-kernel impulse SpMV |
+| Phase 2: NTT polynomial (ntt) | algebraic NMT PCS openings |
+| Phase 3: Poseidon2 hashing (p2r) | Hemera content addressing + Fiat-Shamir |
+| Phase 4: lookup table (lut) | activation + threshold checks |
+
+the chip specification does not change. the economic model changes: every hash cycle produces real knowledge instead of synthetic proof-of-capability.
+
+see [[Goldilocks field processor]] for chip specification and flywheel economics. see [[cyber/nomics]] for reward mechanics. see [[foculus]] for how φ* determines finality. see [[cyber/research/provable consensus]] for how the global tri-kernel fits in zheng. see [[cyber/research/algorithmic essence of superintelligence]] for the full 16-component architecture