Copy English

Why

Most of this catalogue assumes the interesting data is already on-chain. Real institutional workloads are the opposite: the authoritative record is in a private system that cannot be published, and the chain is only the settlement venue. That inversion is what the four patterns — RWA servicing, proof of reserves, DvP, prediction-market settlement — all share, and it is the same split this project keeps arriving at from the other direction: enforce on-chain, remember off-chain.

How it works

Reading note: four patterns sharing one shape — a private system of record, a verified bridge that attests to it without publishing it, and on-chain settlement conditioned on that attestation. The load-bearing question in each is what the bridge's attestation is actually worth, since the chain cannot check the private data itself.

Related code

# CRE x Cloud — four hybrid patterns sharing one shape:
# private system of record -> verified bridge (attests without publishing) -> on-chain
# settlement conditioned on that attestation. Picks a pattern from a small decision table.

from dataclasses import dataclass


@dataclass
class Pattern:
    name: str
    private_record: str
    bridge_attests: str
    onchain_settles: str


PATTERNS = [
    Pattern("RWA servicing", "loan servicer's ledger", "payment/default status", "token holder distributions"),
    Pattern("Proof of reserves", "custodian's bank balance", "reserve >= liabilities", "mint/pause of wrapped asset"),
    Pattern("DvP", "securities registrar", "asset leg delivered", "cash leg release"),
    Pattern("Prediction-market settlement", "real-world event outcome", "outcome resolution", "payout to winning side"),
]


def select_pattern(workload_keyword: str) -> Pattern:
    """Match an incoming workload description to one of the four patterns."""
    keyword = workload_keyword.lower()
    for pattern in PATTERNS:
        if keyword in pattern.name.lower():
            return pattern
    raise ValueError(f"no CRE x Cloud pattern matches: {workload_keyword!r}")


def attestation_gate(bridge_confidence: float, threshold: float = 0.99) -> bool:
    """On-chain settlement is conditioned on the bridge's attestation clearing a bar,
    since the chain itself cannot inspect the private data behind it."""
    return bridge_confidence >= threshold


if __name__ == "__main__":
    print("CRE x Cloud — four hybrid patterns, one shared shape\n")
    for pattern in PATTERNS:
        print(f"- {pattern.name}")
        print(f"    private record : {pattern.private_record}")
        print(f"    bridge attests : {pattern.bridge_attests}")
        print(f"    chain settles  : {pattern.onchain_settles}")

    print("\nGating settlement on attestation confidence:")
    for workload, confidence in [("proof of reserves", 0.995), ("dvp", 0.80)]:
        pattern = select_pattern(workload)
        cleared = attestation_gate(confidence)
        verdict = "settle on-chain" if cleared else "hold — attestation too weak"
        print(f"  {pattern.name:<28} confidence={confidence:.3f} -> {verdict}")

docs/code/pocs/cre-cloud.py

Where it lands in Jayverse

• Verex: treat market resolution as this exact pattern — a private source, a verified bridge, on-chain settlement. Since the chain can't check the venue/admin data itself, document per market what the resolution oracle's attestation actually covers, not just that a resolution happened.
• Auditor: write, per CRE-style integration, what the bridge's attestation is worth and by what rule. This is the Auditor row's exact job — the private data never gets published, so the methodology note is the only thing a consumer can check.
• Number: readings sourced from private/licensed data should enforce access on-chain and remember data off-chain. Same split Jayverse keeps arriving at elsewhere — a permission token on-chain, the actual reading kept off-chain until the permission is checked.

← All Knowledge Notes · Workspace Index · Top ↑

Copy 한국어

CRE × Cloud — 하이브리드 4패턴

진실은 클라우드에, 검증된 다리는 CRE, 정산은 체인.

참조 — docs/features/cre-cloud.md.

왜

이 카탈로그의 대부분은 흥미로운 데이터가 이미 온체인에 있다고 가정합니다. 실제 기관 워크로드는 정반대입니다 — 권위 있는 기록은 공개할 수 없는 사설 시스템에 있고, 체인은 정산 장소일 뿐입니다. 네 패턴(RWA 서비싱·준비금 증명·DvP·예측시장 정산)이 공유하는 게 그 뒤집힘이고, 이 프로젝트가 반대 방향에서 계속 도달하는 바로 그 분리이기도 합니다: 강제는 온체인, 기억은 오프체인.

동작 방식

정독 노트: 하나의 모양을 공유하는 네 패턴 — 사설 원장, 그것을 공개하지 않으면서 증명하는 검증된 다리, 그리고 그 증명에 조건부인 온체인 정산. 각각에서 핵심 질문은 그 다리의 증명이 실제로 얼마짜리인가입니다. 체인은 사설 데이터 자체를 검사할 수 없으니까요.

관련 코드

# CRE x Cloud — four hybrid patterns sharing one shape:
# private system of record -> verified bridge (attests without publishing) -> on-chain
# settlement conditioned on that attestation. Picks a pattern from a small decision table.

from dataclasses import dataclass


@dataclass
class Pattern:
    name: str
    private_record: str
    bridge_attests: str
    onchain_settles: str


PATTERNS = [
    Pattern("RWA servicing", "loan servicer's ledger", "payment/default status", "token holder distributions"),
    Pattern("Proof of reserves", "custodian's bank balance", "reserve >= liabilities", "mint/pause of wrapped asset"),
    Pattern("DvP", "securities registrar", "asset leg delivered", "cash leg release"),
    Pattern("Prediction-market settlement", "real-world event outcome", "outcome resolution", "payout to winning side"),
]


def select_pattern(workload_keyword: str) -> Pattern:
    """Match an incoming workload description to one of the four patterns."""
    keyword = workload_keyword.lower()
    for pattern in PATTERNS:
        if keyword in pattern.name.lower():
            return pattern
    raise ValueError(f"no CRE x Cloud pattern matches: {workload_keyword!r}")


def attestation_gate(bridge_confidence: float, threshold: float = 0.99) -> bool:
    """On-chain settlement is conditioned on the bridge's attestation clearing a bar,
    since the chain itself cannot inspect the private data behind it."""
    return bridge_confidence >= threshold


if __name__ == "__main__":
    print("CRE x Cloud — four hybrid patterns, one shared shape\n")
    for pattern in PATTERNS:
        print(f"- {pattern.name}")
        print(f"    private record : {pattern.private_record}")
        print(f"    bridge attests : {pattern.bridge_attests}")
        print(f"    chain settles  : {pattern.onchain_settles}")

    print("\nGating settlement on attestation confidence:")
    for workload, confidence in [("proof of reserves", 0.995), ("dvp", 0.80)]:
        pattern = select_pattern(workload)
        cleared = attestation_gate(confidence)
        verdict = "settle on-chain" if cleared else "hold — attestation too weak"
        print(f"  {pattern.name:<28} confidence={confidence:.3f} -> {verdict}")

docs/code/pocs/cre-cloud.py

Jayverse에서의 위치

• Verex: 마켓 정산을 정확히 이 패턴으로 다룬다. 비공개 소스, 검증된 브리지, 온체인 정산. 체인이 거래소/관리자 데이터를 직접 확인할 수 없으므로, 정산이 일어났다는 사실뿐 아니라 정산 오라클의 증명이 실제로 무엇을 보장하는지를 마켓별로 문서화한다.
• Auditor: CRE 방식 연동마다 브리지의 증명이 어떤 가치가 있고 어떤 규칙에 따르는지 적는다. 이것이 정확히 Auditor 행의 역할이다. 비공개 데이터는 절대 공개되지 않으므로, 소비자가 확인할 수 있는 것은 방법론 노트뿐이다.
• Number: 비공개/라이선스 데이터에서 온 읽기는 접근을 온체인에서 강제하고 데이터는 오프체인에 둔다. Jayverse가 다른 곳에서도 계속 도달하는 것과 같은 분리다. 권한 토큰은 온체인에, 실제 읽기는 권한이 확인될 때까지 오프체인에 남는다.

← 전체 기술 노트 · 워크스페이스 인덱스 · 맨 위 ↑