Remnant Fieldworks Inc.
Pre-Execution
Governance Infrastructure
Building the verification layer between intention and execution — for AI agents, automated workflows, financial systems, and critical infrastructure.
Proof Before Power™ · Verification Before Execution™
The Core Shift
Why Verification Before Execution™?
Most systems act first and check later. We move the checkpoint to the moment that actually matters — before the action fires.
Without ExecutionProof
Executes first
The action fires before anyone confirms it should.
Audits later
Review happens after the fact — if at all.
Discovers failure afterward
Damage is found once it is already done.
With ExecutionProof™
Verifies first
Authority, policy, evidence, state, and risk are checked up front.
Executes second
Only verified actions are allowed to proceed.
Generates proof automatically
Every decision leaves a signed, tamper-evident record.
The Governing Doctrine
Proof Before Power™
Before systems are given power to act, they must be able to prove authority, evidence, state, and control. This is the doctrine behind everything Remnant Fieldworks builds.
RF-000.1 · Core Law
“If it cannot be verified, it cannot execute.”
Under RF-100's proposed requirements, every action carries a verifiable authorization chain before execution begins.
RF-000.2 · Core Doctrine
“Verification Before Execution™.”
The sequence is invariant: verify first, execute second. Verification is the gate. The sequence cannot be reversed, bypassed, or deferred.
RF-000.3 · Core Philosophy
“Proof Before Power.”
Authority must be proven, not assumed. Power over systems, capital, or people is legitimate only when the authorization behind it can be independently verified.
Control · Decision · Execution
“Capability does not equal authority; execution should be permitted only when authority, evidence, constraints, state, and admissibility are verified at the execution boundary.”
This doctrine is documented in depth across the founder’s published work — 9 published books and 75+ articles on pre-execution governance, the verification boundary, and proof-first authorization.
The Story in Five Words
Doctrine → Framework → Standard → Platform → Proof
Doctrine
The governing belief
Framework
How verification works
Standard
RF-100 conformance
Platform
ExecutionProof
Proof
The signed record
The Flagship Platform
ExecutionProof™
The universal pre-execution control layer. Every high-impact action passes through one gate before it is allowed to act.
Verification Gate
ExecutionProof™ receives a proposed action, verifies authority, evidence, policy, state, and risk, returns ALLOW / HOLD / DENY, and generates a signed, tamper-evident ProofRecord™ — a verifiable receipt of the execution decision — before the action proceeds.
The flagship verification engine is operational today — a live /v2/verify endpoint returning real ALLOW / HOLD / DENY decisions with HMAC-signed ProofRecords™ and working HOLD resolution. Live pilot integrations are open now.
ExecutionProof™ is a Remnant Fieldworks™ platform built on the Proof Before Power™ doctrine and the Verification Before Execution™ framework. Each decision produces a ProofRecord™ for auditability, reconstruction, and accountability.
Explore ExecutionProof.ioMarket Coverage
Where Execution Meets Consequence
The patent-pending portfolio maps pre-execution governance across every domain where unverified action carries real-world consequence — from AI agents to financial settlement to physical infrastructure.
AI Agents & Autonomous Systems
Intercept and verify AI-generated actions before they execute — ensuring authority, intent, and policy compliance at the moment an agent acts, not after.
Enterprise Automation
Apply proof-gated execution control to automated workflows, RPA, and orchestration layers — so no high-consequence process runs on cached permission alone.
Data Centers & AI Compute
Inheritance-bound governance for power allocation, cooling, grid capacity, and infrastructure provisioning — verification of physical-domain conditions before compute executes.
Treasury & Payments
Proof-gated authorization for capital movement, wire transfers, payment rails, and settlement — verifying authority and limits before money moves.
Digital Assets & DeFi
Pre-execution verification for wallet operations, smart contract interactions, and on-chain transactions — governance that intervenes before irreversible transfers.
Insurance & Risk
Enforce underwriting constraints at the execution boundary — ensuring coverage conditions, exclusions, and authority are verified before claims or policy actions proceed.
Healthcare & Regulated Systems
Verify authorization, safety constraints, and regulatory compliance before care actions, prescriptions, or regulated processes execute.
Critical Infrastructure
Hold high-impact commands — grid operations, industrial control, safety-critical systems — until every condition, constraint, and authority is verified and recorded.
48 provisionals · 8 pending U.S. non-provisional applications · 56 total · Patent pending
Innovation & Intellectual Property
A Patent-Pending Governance Architecture
Remnant Fieldworks™ has filed 56 USPTO filings: 48 provisional patent applications (filed January 2026) and 8 pending nonprovisional utility applications (1 parent + 7 continuations-in-part) — directed to proof-first, pre-execution governance for AI, automated, human-authorized, financial, infrastructure, privacy, consent, ownership, insurance, and other high-consequence systems.
Patent-Pending Portfolio
56 USPTO Filings
48 provisional patent applications (filed January 2026) and 8 pending nonprovisional utility applications (1 parent + 7 continuations-in-part). All commercially significant subject matter across the provisionals is consolidated into the nonprovisional stack.
App. Nos. 19/529,283 · 19/731,050 · 19/731,090 · 19/731,110 · 19/731,118 · 19/732,539 · 19/732,564 · 19/732,615 · Patent Pending
RFCA
Certification Authority
The Remnant Fieldworks Certification Authority — the certification pathway for verifying RF-100 conformance.
Under DevelopmentConformance Profiles
Domain-specific RF-100 profiles tailored to the realities of each high-impact vertical.
Nonprovisional Portfolio
Eight pending U.S. nonprovisional utility applications — one parent and seven continuations-in-part.
| App. No. | Filed | Portfolio Name | Scope |
|---|---|---|---|
| 19/529,283 | Feb 4, 2026 | Parent / Foundational | Policy-gated execution with proof-first authorization and tamper-evident evidence artifacts; anchors the execution-bound governance spine and priority continuity to all 48 provisionals. |
| 19/731,050 | Jul 4, 2026 | AI Compute Infrastructure | Data center / compute infrastructure governance and readiness for AI execution environments (power, cooling, water, grid, inheritance burden vectors). |
| 19/731,090 | Jul 5, 2026 | AI-Generated Actions | Governance of AI-generated actions: authority, evidence, constraints, execution admissibility; agent gating, M-of-N approval, self-approval blocking. |
| 19/731,110 | Jul 5, 2026 | Tamper-Evident Proof | ProofRecord™ / audit-clean evidence generation for execution events and verifiable runtime outcomes. |
| 19/731,118 | Jul 5, 2026 | Financial Execution | Financial execution governance, authorization, verification, and proof around high-impact transaction and treasury events. |
| 19/732,539 | Jul 6, 2026 | AI Safety / Consent / Privacy | AI safety monitoring, consent-based access control, privacy-preserving data governance in autonomous computing environments. |
| 19/732,564 | Jul 7, 2026 | Stewardship / Ownership | Ownership-bound execution control, stewardship verification, field-interlock access management. |
| 19/732,615 | Jul 7, 2026 | Risk / Insurance / Claims | Risk-adaptive governance, coverage-bound execution control, verifiable claims processing for AI and autonomous systems. |
Strategic Portfolio Map
One patent family, organized into five strategic pillars — from the foundational execution spine to the domains it governs.
Foundation
The execution-bound governance spine.
Infrastructure
Compute readiness, safety, consent, privacy.
AI Governance
AI actions, ownership-bound control, stewardship, access.
Proof / Audit
Tamper-evident proof of execution events.
Financial / Claims Execution
Money movement, risk-adaptive coverage, claims.
Filing Timeline
48 provisional patent applications
Priority foundation spanning the full pre-execution governance architecture — proof-first authorization, runtime enforcement, evidence and audit, rights and consent, treasury, infrastructure, stewardship, insurance, and commercial governance.
Parent nonprovisional — U.S. App. No. 19/529,283
Policy-gated execution with proof-first authorization and tamper-evident evidence artifacts; establishes the execution-bound governance spine and priority continuity to all 48 provisionals.
7 continuations-in-part — 19/731,050 through 19/732,615
CIP wave extending the spine across AI compute infrastructure, AI-generated actions, tamper-evident proof, financial execution, AI safety and consent, ownership and stewardship, and risk / insurance / claims.
Architecture Themes
Applications pending before the USPTO. No assurance is given that any claim will be granted. This information is provided for general portfolio description and does not constitute legal advice.
“Patent pending” means U.S. patent applications have been filed and are pending examination. It does not mean any patent has issued, that any claim has been allowed, or that the USPTO has endorsed the technology. Patent rights, if any, are subject to examination and issued claim scope.
The Standards Pathway
RF-100: Emerging Field Standard
RF-100 is Remnant Fieldworks’ emerging field standard for verification-first execution control. It is being developed as a practical conformance pathway for organizations that need proof before high-impact execution.
What RF-100 Defines
RF-100 defines the minimum structure a high-impact system should satisfy before execution:
RF Standard Architecture
Research & Public Record
RF-100 is supported by a preregistered experimental corpus of 75 experiments across 253 case records (250 PASS, 2 preserved FAIL, 1 preserved GATE-STOP) — including the ARK enforcement-boundary and enterprise-adapter series and the OMNI, TRINITY, WITNESS, BELLWETHER, and CHRONO quantum-evidence series — all archived, citable, and open for critique.
RF-100 Draft (archived, citable)
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21366342Open review repository
github.com/derekhone/rf-100Public critique invited; feedback incorporated with attribution.
Research discipline
Preregistered hypotheses with published negative results — failures reported in full alongside successes, before any commercial claim.
Public Research Record
The evidence is on the record
Every claim behind ExecutionProof™ is backed by a preregistered, publicly archived experiment corpus — including the results that did not pass. What began as a single 18-experiment ARK cycle is now a reconciled research program spanning six phases and eight research tracks. The record is designed to be audited, not admired.
“Permission at approval time is not necessarily permission at execution time. Verification must occur at the execution boundary.”
These are distinct units: preregistered experiments are distinct experiment identifiers; case records are individual scored case runs (many experiments contribute more than one). The 253 case-records figure mixes terminal-record counting (earlier phases) with per-scored-case counting (ARK-493–498 +161, ARK-499–501 +21). ARK-502 (bounded smoke; endurance not executed) and ARK-503 (awaiting independent review) contribute 0 scored PASS and are excluded from the tally.
The two preserved FAILs and one gate-stop are not gaps in the record — they are the record. A corpus that only ever reports success is not evidence; it is marketing.
Corpus by phase
The full ExecutionProof experimental record, organized by phase from hardware authorization boundary through enterprise readiness.
Hardware authorization boundary
8 IDs · 7 PASS · 1 FAIL · 1 GATE-STOP
The founding ARK cycle — tested on real IBM Quantum hardware. ARK-445 FAIL (preserved) → 445b retest PASS. ARK-448 GATE-STOP (preserved). Current-state authority, exact-action binding, workflow isolation, three-state ALLOW / HOLD / DENY, and self-approval refusal.
Synthetic boundary completion
9 IDs · all PASS except ARK-455 FAIL (preserved)
ARK-455 FAIL (preserved) → 455b retest PASS. Synthetic phase CLOSED. ARK-457 published (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21421742). State-change attacks, substitution, revocation, workflow, conflicting-evidence, self-approval, dependency-loss, and cross-context replay patterns addressed.
Production-boundary matrix
25 IDs · 25 / 25 PASS · 20,000 decisions
5 real-world domains (cloud IAM, production deployment, destructive DB action, financial transaction, API policy/rate limits) × 5 failure modes. 20,000 / 20,000 dual-guard agreement, 5,306 / 5,306 wrong-allows detected. Bounded test environments — not production certification.
Latency / throughput / scale
10 IDs · all PASS · all published
Verification p95 1.822 µs (Python) / 0.652 µs (JS); burst 1.66 M/s (Py) / 4.52 M/s (JS). Bounded single-threaded in-memory engineering evidence — not production certification. Includes preserved public correction to the ARK-486 cost model. DOIs 10.5281/zenodo.21434398–21434413.
Enforcement-boundary integrity
6 IDs · 161 / 161 PASS · 0 enforcement leaks
Mechanical enforcement-boundary integrity: the gate holds across execution paths with zero enforcement leaks under adversarial load, deep mutation, timing races, and delegation abuse. Includes 10 / 10 independent tamper detection with 0 false positives (ARK-497) and fail-closed behavior with 100% independently signature-verifiable proofs in a production-like networked run (ARK-498).
Enterprise adapter & operational readiness
5 IDs · 499/500/501 PASS · 502 SMOKE-PASS · 503 awaiting review
ARK-499/500/501 EXPERIMENT-PASS (7/7 each; real self-hosted PostgreSQL 17, git CI/CD, RS256 OIDC/JWKS boundaries). Core finding: the authorization boundary did not need to change to meet real enterprise surfaces — only the adapters did. ARK-502 SMOKE-PASS (418 ops, 0 leaks; ≥14-day endurance NOT executed, 0 scored). ARK-503 NOT-EXECUTED (reviewer package delivered, awaiting human reviewer, 0 scored). Labels: real but self-hosted (NOT Docker/K8s/cloud; NOT Okta/Azure AD/Auth0).
Quantum-evidence & scientific research
10 IDs, all PASS, all published — real-hardware experimental evidence, not new physics, not universal security proofs. Device-dependent, not loophole-free. Broader research series exploring quantum-sourced provenance, temporal and contextual witnesses, and coherence.
Quantum-sourced authorization evidence
WITNESS-3: CHSH S = 2.545 (15.8σ)*
Provider-record verification, tamper / substitution detection, replay rejection, and multi-source nonce construction anchored to IBM quantum measurements, NIST randomness-beacon data, and LIGO / GW150914 archival data. WITNESS-4 is planned and excluded from the corpus count — do not cite as executed.
Quantum-hardware correlations
S = 2.514 · |M| = 3.423 · χ = 5.268–5.376*
Bell-CHSH spatial correlations, multipartite Mermin correlations, and Peres–Mermin contextuality measured on quantum hardware.
Temporal witness
CHRONO-1: K3 = 1.450*
A Leggett–Garg temporal-inequality test bound into an authorization record, under the documented device conditions.
Combined witness in one governed job
S = 2.797 · K3 = 1.502 · χmin = 5.126 · 52,000 shots · ALLOW*
Spatial Bell-CHSH, temporal Leggett–Garg, and contextual Peres–Mermin witnesses fused into one governed hardware job. A published six-point erratum (v1.1) corrects the shot-count, nonce, contextual-significance, K3 wording, novelty wording, and a qubit-mapping logging defect.
Three-processor fused witness
TRINITY-1: S = 2.736 / 2.579 / 2.741 across 3 devices · 48,000 shots · ALLOW*
The same Bell-CHSH witness independently evaluated on three distinct IBM Heron r2 processors (ibm_kingston, ibm_fez, ibm_marrakesh) — no device averaged away. Three device results are cryptographically fused into one chain-linked, independently reconstructable ExecutionProof record. TRINITY-2 extends this to a governed simulated payment authorization with quorum logic.
Coherent Inheritance Framework
Remnant Fieldworks’ broader research framework for coherence, inheritance, drift, recovery, and bounded operation (Phase 1). Formerly developed under the working title Unified Inheritance Physics.
* Quantum results hold within their stated device-dependent conditions and tested circuit model. They are demonstrations of quantum-sourced evidence and provenance, not general physical claims beyond those conditions.
How the record is kept honest
Preregistration locks
Hypotheses and a SHA-256 MANIFEST are committed before execution — criteria cannot move after results are known.
Fixed pass/fail criteria
Success conditions are defined up front. No post-hoc redefinition of what counts as a pass.
Dual independent verifiers
Records are checked by independent verification paths before entry into the corpus.
Published corrections
Failures, gate-stops, and errata are published in full alongside successes — disclosed through a formal public correction process, never quietly removed.
Git provenance
Public commit history with MANIFEST SHA-256 hashes provides a timestamped, tamper-evident record of each experiment.
Live archival DOIs
Each series is archived on Zenodo with permanent concept DOIs — citable, versioned, and open for external critique.
Source repositories
Remnant Fieldworks maintains nine public repositories: eight experimental and implementation repositories, plus the separate RF-100 standards repository.
executionproof-testbeds
Canonical ARK / P01 / P02 track
witness-testbeds
WITNESS quantum-evidence series
bellwether-testbeds
BELLWETHER correlation series
chrono-testbeds
CHRONO temporal-witness series
omni-testbeds
OMNI combined-witness series
cif-phase1-testbeds
Coherent Inheritance Framework — Phase 1
trinity-testbeds
TRINITY cross-processor fused witness series
vaultproof-agent-guard
VaultProof agent-wallet guard
rf-100
RF-100 standard · separate standards repository
Archived & citable
Research series (concept DOI)
Published Zenodo depositions, including experiment versions and series concept records. The concept DOI always resolves to the latest archived version of the series.
DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21398675OMNI-1 — cite the concept DOI
A six-point erratum (v1.1) corrects the original OMNI-1 record. Cite the concept DOI, which resolves to the corrected version; original and corrected versions are both preserved.
How the architecture fits together
Ecosystem
One Architecture. Three Entry Points.
Remnant Fieldworks™ is the parent company and IP architecture layer. The platform and console are purpose-built entry points into the same proof-first governance stack.
ExecutionProof™
The Platform
The pre-execution governance layer. ExecutionProof sits at the execution boundary — verifying authority, evidence, constraints, and state before AI agents, workflows, APIs, infrastructure, or financial systems are allowed to act.
"If it cannot be verified, it cannot execute."
Boundary Console
The Builder
The ExecutionProof Boundary Console. Define high-consequence actions, map authority rules, configure evidence and constraint requirements, simulate ALLOW / HOLD / DENY decisions, and generate Execution Boundary Profiles for pilot or integration.
"Define the boundary before the system acts."
All three properties share the same patent-pending governance architecture, doctrine, and standards framework. Each serves a distinct role in the Remnant Fieldworks™ ecosystem.
What We Offer Today
One Free Tool. Two Remote Paths.
Today, Remnant Fieldworks offers one free open-source reference tool and two remote commercial paths: a Validation Sprint and a Supervised Pilot. Hosted plans, RF-100 assessments, and certification pathways will come later as the standard, backend, and crosswalk mature.
The Sprint and Pilot are not additive. Because 100% of the Sprint fee is credited toward the Supervised Pilot, your total engagement cost is the final Pilot price — a typical complete Sprint-to-Pilot engagement is approximately $25,000 total.
VaultProof Agent Guard
Open-source experimental reference tool for AI-agent wallet governance.
- ALLOW / HOLD / DENY logic
- Local policy checks
- Sample profiles
- Spend caps
- Allowlists
- Drain-vector blocking
- Telegram HOLD approval path
- Testnet / disposable-wallet use only
Experimental open-source reference implementation. Not audited. Not for production funds.
Request AccessRemote Execution Boundary Validation Sprint
Define one real execution boundary before a pilot.
- One remote kickoff
- One workflow / boundary review
- One governed-action definition
- Authority / evidence / constraints / state mapping
- ALLOW / HOLD / DENY recommendation
- Execution Boundary Profile draft
- RF-100 alignment memo
- Pilot recommendation
- 100% of the Sprint fee credited toward a subsequent Supervised Pilot
Timeline: approximately 10 business days
InquireSupervised Pilot
Test ExecutionProof against one real workflow.
- One defined execution boundary
- Remote setup
- ALLOW / HOLD / DENY test cases
- ProofRecord / VDR output
- HOLD and DENY no-execution testing
- Replay / expiry / parameter-change testing where applicable
- Pilot findings report
- Production-hardening roadmap
- You pay only the remaining balance after the Sprint credit is applied
Weeks 1–2
Boundary setup, remote integration, and policy configuration
Weeks 3–4
ALLOW / HOLD / DENY test execution and ProofRecord capture
Weeks 5–6
Findings report and production-hardening roadmap
4–6 week engagement
InquireDesign-Partner Pricing
Design-partner pricing (Supervised Pilot from $15,000) is available only in exchange for written case-study / testimonial rights, a recognizable reference, or a defined expansion path.
Coming Soon · Waitlist Only
These paths open as the platform, hosted product, crosswalk, and certification pathway mature. Contact us to join the waitlist.
The ExecutionProof™ Series
A governance library of 9 published books and 75+ articles documenting the doctrine, framework, standard, and platform — the written backbone behind the company.
9
Books Published
75+
Articles
#1
Amazon Kindle · Free
The Company
Remnant Fieldworks™
A patent-pending governance infrastructure company building the verification layer between intention and execution.
Derek Hone
Founder & Named Inventor
Sole named inventor on all 56 U.S. patent filings (USPTO Customer No. 236398), filed pro se. Author of 9 published books and 75+ articles. Creator of the Proof Before Power™ doctrine, the Verification Before Execution™ framework, and the RF-100 governance standard.
Remnant Fieldworks began with a single thesis: high-consequence systems should not be allowed to execute merely because an agent, user, or workflow requested action. Every system in the portfolio — from AI governance to data-center operations to financial execution — enforces that thesis at the execution boundary.
Derek Hone
Founder
Adith Kadam Ramesh
Systems Engineer
56 Filed / Pending
Patent Applications Filed
9 Books · 75+ Articles
Published Works
RF-100
Governance Standard
Pilot Pathway
Start with One Boundary.
You don't have to govern everything at once. Pick one high-impact action, put it behind ExecutionProof, and prove the model on a single boundary.