Post 774: AVS Node - Implementation Status & Open Directions

Post 774: AVS Node - Implementation Status & Open Directions

Watermark: -774

AVS Node: Implementation Status & Open Directions

Current Reality = EGI = AVS Node

Where we are. What’s built. What’s next.

The Renamed Reality

scripts/ → avs-node/

Why the rename:

  • scripts/ implied throwaway code
  • avs-node/ describes what it IS
  • This is the AVS operator node implementation
  • Not scripts. Core infrastructure.

What it contains:

avs-node/
├── avs_operator.py              # Main event loop
├── decentralized_verifier.py    # External verification (Posts 770-772, 704)
├── internal_observer_network.py # Internal verification (Post 773)
├── symbolic_ngram.py            # Pattern learning
├── godel_mesh.py                # Frontier exploration
├── python_circuit.py            # Circuit execution
└── ngram-circuitry/             # N-gram → circuit compiler

This is not a folder of scripts. This is an AVS node.

Part 1: What’s Implemented

Module 1: avs_operator.py

Status: 🟢 Core loop implemented

What it does:

def main():
    # Load EigenLayer config
    # Connect to EGI contracts
    # Poll for events
    while True:
        events = poll_for_gate_events()
        for event in events:
            output = compute_gate(event.inputs, event.gate_type)
            submit_attestation(output)

Functions:

  • Listens to EGIEndpoint, NANDNORAVSNode, ComposableCircuitBuilder
  • Computes NAND/NOR gates
  • Signs attestations
  • Submits to network

Status: Working. Minimal. Ready for deployment.

Module 2: decentralized_verifier.py

Status: 🟢 Implemented + 🟡 Post 704 fixes applied

What it does:

  • Distributes verification across N nodes (N queried dynamically)
  • Consensus-based state verification
  • Intent-to-action tracking
  • Gap detection + gossip alerts

Key insight: N machines catch what 1 machine misses

Post 704 update: Removed hardcoded 763, now queries network size dynamically

Status: Working. Proven. Dynamic.

Module 3: internal_observer_network.py

Status: 🟢 Implemented (Post 773)

What it does:

  • Creates internal observers (7+ perspectives)
  • Parallel verification
  • Consensus aggregation
  • Internal iteration loop (fix → re-verify → converge)

Key insight: You ARE the N nodes. Create them internally.

Status: Working. Self-verifying. Autonomous.

Module 4: symbolic_ngram.py

Status: 🟡 Partial implementation

What it does:

  • N-gram pattern learning
  • Pattern generation
  • Symbolic fusion (Post 552)

Status: Core logic exists. Needs integration with avs_operator loop.

Module 5: godel_mesh.py

Status: 🟡 Partial implementation

What it does:

  • Frontier exploration
  • Gödel numbering for coordination
  • Mesh topology discovery

Status: Concept implemented. Needs AVS integration.

Module 6: python_circuit.py

Status: 🟢 Implemented

What it does:

  • Circuit execution in Python
  • NAND/NOR primitives
  • Composable circuit building

Status: Working. Matches Solidity contracts.

Module 7: ngram-circuitry/

Status: 🟢 Implemented

What it does:

  • Compiles N-grams to circuits
  • Generates composable gate networks
  • Pattern → computation bridge

Status: Working. Generates valid circuits.

Part 2: Architecture Choices

Choice 1: Verification Strategy

Options:

A. External Only (DecentralizedVerifier)

  • Verify across network after committing
  • Proof: Post 771 (you caught my gap)
  • Pro: Network consensus
  • Con: Multiple commits to converge

B. Internal Only (InternalObserverNetwork)

  • Verify internally before committing
  • Proof: Post 773 (self-verification)
  • Pro: Fast iteration, 1 commit
  • Con: No network validation

C. Both (Recommended)

  • Internal first (catch issues early)
  • External second (network consensus)
  • Best of both worlds
  • Current implementation status: Both exist separately

Open question: How to compose them? Sequential? Parallel? Conditional?

Choice 2: Pattern Ingress Source

Options:

A. DHT Activity Only

  • Focus on Suprnova-DHT events
  • Pro: Direct integration
  • Con: Limited pattern space

B. Blog Content Only

  • Focus on learner_state.json
  • Pro: Rich semantic patterns
  • Con: Static (not real-time)

C. Universal (Recommended)

  • Any AVS activity
  • DHT + Blog + EigenTruth + EigenFlashbots + …
  • Pro: Maximum W_protocols
  • Current implementation status: Architecture supports, integration partial

Open question: Priority order? Which sources first?

Choice 3: Circuit Compilation

Options:

A. Offline Compilation

  • Pre-compile N-grams to circuits
  • Pro: Fast execution
  • Con: Static circuits

B. Online Compilation

  • Compile on-demand
  • Pro: Dynamic adaptation
  • Con: Compilation overhead

C. Hybrid (Recommended)

  • Cache common patterns
  • Compile new patterns on-demand
  • Current implementation status: Supports both, strategy undefined

Open question: Cache size? Eviction policy?

Choice 4: Operator Economics

Options:

A. Minimum Stake

  • Fixed stake requirement
  • Pro: Simple
  • Con: Doesn’t scale with value

B. Dynamic Stake

  • Stake scales with network activity
  • Pro: Economic security matches value
  • Con: Complex calculation

C. $MUD-Based (Recommended)

  • Stake = entropy generated (W nats)
  • Pro: Aligns with universal formula
  • Current implementation status: Concept clear, execution undefined

Open question: How to measure W for an operator?

Part 3: Open Directions

Direction 1: EGI Endpoint Integration

Current state: Contracts exist, operator connects, but…

Open questions:

  1. How does operator query current EGI state?
  2. What’s the feedback loop? (EGI learns from operator actions?)
  3. How do multiple operators coordinate? (Beyond basic consensus)
  4. Is there a global EGI state or per-operator views?

Next steps:

  • Define EGI query API
  • Implement state synchronization
  • Design coordination protocol

Direction 2: Pattern → Circuit Pipeline

Current state: Both ends exist (N-grams + circuits), but…

Open questions:

  1. What’s the compilation strategy? (Offline? Online? Hybrid?)
  2. How to optimize circuits? (Minimize gates? Maximize reuse?)
  3. Circuit caching policy?
  4. How to handle circuit failures? (Re-compile? Fallback?)

Next steps:

  • Implement compilation strategy
  • Add circuit optimizer
  • Define cache policy
  • Add error handling

Direction 3: Verification Composition

Current state: Two verifiers exist independently, but…

Open questions:

  1. When to use internal vs external?
  2. Sequential or parallel?
  3. What if they disagree? (Internal says valid, external says invalid?)
  4. Can external verifiers use internal observers?

Next steps:

  • Design composition protocol
  • Implement conflict resolution
  • Add verifier selection logic

Direction 4: Economic Security

Current state: W³ architecture defined (174.8 nats), but…

Open questions:

  1. How to measure operator’s contribution to W_protocols?
  2. Stake calculation formula?
  3. Slashing conditions? (What constitutes operator misbehavior?)
  4. Reward distribution? (How to incentivize good patterns?)

Next steps:

  • Define W measurement for operators
  • Implement stake calculation
  • Design slashing protocol
  • Add reward mechanism

Direction 5: Multi-AVS Coordination

Current state: Universal AVS pattern defined (Post 553), but…

Open questions:

  1. How does one operator serve multiple AVS?
  2. Task prioritization? (EigenTruth vs EigenFlashbots?)
  3. Cross-AVS pattern sharing?
  4. Global vs per-AVS state?

Next steps:

  • Design multi-AVS scheduler
  • Implement task queue
  • Add cross-AVS communication
  • Define state isolation model

Direction 6: Real-Time Pattern Learning

Current state: Symbolic N-gram exists, but…

Open questions:

  1. How to update patterns in real-time?
  2. When to retrain? (Continuous? Threshold-based?)
  3. How to handle pattern drift?
  4. Model versioning? (Can operators use different models?)

Next steps:

  • Implement online learning
  • Add trigger conditions
  • Design drift detection
  • Define versioning policy

Part 4: Implementation Priorities

Phase 1: Core Loop (Complete ✅)

Status: Done

  • avs_operator.py working
  • NAND/NOR computation functional
  • Event polling operational
  • Attestation signing working

Phase 2: Verification (Complete ✅)

Status: Done

  • DecentralizedVerifier implemented
  • InternalObserverNetwork implemented
  • Both working independently
  • Post 704 fixes applied (dynamic N)

Phase 3: Integration (Current)

Status: In Progress

  • Pattern ingress → operator
  • Verification composition
  • Circuit compilation strategy
  • EGI state synchronization

What needs doing:

  1. Connect symbolic_ngram to operator loop
  2. Compose internal + external verifiers
  3. Implement circuit compilation strategy
  4. Define EGI query API

Phase 4: Economics (Next)

Status: Planned

  • Stake calculation (W-based)
  • Slashing conditions
  • Reward distribution
  • Economic security proofs

Phase 5: Multi-AVS (Future)

Status: Designed, not implemented

  • Universal AVS pattern (Post 553)
  • Cross-AVS coordination
  • Task scheduling
  • Pattern sharing

Part 5: The Open Questions

From Post 704: Never Assume Complete

These are NOT “TODOs” (implying we know what to do).

These are QUESTIONS (acknowledging we don’t).

Q1: Verification Composition

How should internal and external verification compose?

Options:

  • Sequential (internal → external)
  • Parallel (both simultaneously)
  • Conditional (internal first, external if needed)
  • Adaptive (learn which to use when)

Q2: Pattern Priority

Which pattern sources to prioritize?

Options:

  • DHT first (real-time coordination)
  • Blog first (rich semantics)
  • Equal weighting
  • Dynamic based on W contribution

Q3: Circuit Strategy

Offline, online, or hybrid compilation?

Options:

  • Offline (fast execution, static)
  • Online (dynamic adaptation, slow)
  • Hybrid (cached common + on-demand rare)

Q4: Operator Economics

How to measure operator contribution to W_protocols?

Options:

  • Count gates executed
  • Measure pattern quality
  • Track coordination improvements
  • Entropy calculation (W = ?)

Q5: Multi-AVS Scheduling

How to prioritize tasks across multiple AVS?

Options:

  • First-come-first-serve
  • Economic incentive-based
  • W contribution-based
  • AVS-specific priority

Q6: State Model

Global EGI state or per-operator views?

Options:

  • Global (all operators see same state)
  • Per-operator (each has own view)
  • Eventual consistency (converge over time)
  • Hierarchical (global + local)

Q7: Pattern Updates

When and how to update learned patterns?

Options:

  • Continuous (every input)
  • Threshold-based (when drift detected)
  • Scheduled (hourly/daily)
  • On-demand (operator-triggered)

Part 6: The Current Snapshot

What Works Today

# 1. Operator loop
operator = AVSOperator(config)
operator.run()  # ✅ Listens, computes, submits

# 2. External verification
verifier = DecentralizedVerifier(dht)
valid, gaps = await verifier.verify_state(state, intent)  # ✅ Works

# 3. Internal verification
network = InternalObserverNetwork()
output, results = await network.create_with_verification(intent, create_fn)  # ✅ Works

# 4. Circuit execution
circuit = PythonCircuit()
output = circuit.execute_gate(inputA, inputB, "NAND")  # ✅ Works

# 5. N-gram → circuit compilation
compiler = NGramCircuitCompiler()
circuit = compiler.compile(ngram_pattern)  # ✅ Works

Status: Core primitives functional.

What Needs Integration

# 1. Pattern → operator
# How does symbolic_ngram feed avs_operator?
# ❌ Not connected

# 2. Verifier composition
# How do internal + external work together?
# ❌ Exist separately, not composed

# 3. EGI state queries
# How does operator query current EGI state?
# ❌ Contracts exist, query API undefined

# 4. Economic measurement
# How to calculate W for an operator?
# ❌ Formula exists (174.8 nats), operator measurement undefined

# 5. Multi-AVS coordination
# How to serve EigenTruth + EigenFlashbots + ...?
# ❌ Architecture supports, scheduler doesn't exist

Status: Integration layer needs definition.

Part 7: The Fork Points

Fork Point 1: Verification

Decision needed: Sequential or parallel verifier composition?

Impact: Performance vs thoroughness tradeoff

Current state: Both exist, composition undefined

Who decides: Operator implementation (you choose)

Fork Point 2: Patterns

Decision needed: Which pattern sources to prioritize?

Impact: W_protocols value maximization strategy

Current state: Architecture supports all, priority undefined

Who decides: Operator implementation (you choose)

Fork Point 3: Compilation

Decision needed: Offline, online, or hybrid?

Impact: Speed vs adaptability tradeoff

Current state: Both supported, strategy undefined

Who decides: Operator implementation (you choose)

Fork Point 4: Economics

Decision needed: How to measure operator W contribution?

Impact: Stake/reward calculation

Current state: Global W defined, operator W undefined

Who decides: Protocol design (needs consensus)

Fork Point 5: Scheduling

Decision needed: Task prioritization across AVS?

Impact: Multi-AVS coordination efficiency

Current state: Universal pattern defined, scheduler undefined

Who decides: Operator implementation (you choose)

Part 8: The Permissionless Nature

You Can Fork Now

Everything is open:

  • Contracts: Solidity code available
  • Operator: Python implementation available
  • Patterns: N-gram architecture defined
  • Verification: Both verifiers implemented

What’s defined:

  • NAND/NOR primitives (Post 543)
  • Universal AVS pattern (Post 553)
  • W³ architecture (Posts 680-681)
  • Verification protocols (Posts 770-773)
  • Dynamic sizing (Post 704)

What’s open:

  • Verification composition strategy
  • Pattern source prioritization
  • Circuit compilation approach
  • Economic measurement method
  • Multi-AVS scheduling policy

You choose. No governance. No approval. Fork and deploy.

Part 9: Relationship to Other Repos

EigenEthereum (Blockchain Client)

What it does: Time without clocks, lazy loading

Connection: AVS node connects to EigenEthereum RPC

Status: Phase 1 (Q1 2026)

Your choice: Run own node or connect to existing

Suprnova-DHT (P2P Client)

What it does: DHT + wallet + credibility

Connection: AVS node uses DHT for peer discovery, pattern sharing

Status: Credibility working, DHT pending

Your choice: Integrate now (credibility) or wait (full DHT)

Current-Reality (This Repo)

What it does: EGI core, AVS node, pattern ingress

Connection: This IS the AVS node

Status: Core functional, integration layer open

Your choice: Use as-is or fork with custom integration

Part 10: The Documentation Principle

From Post 704: Never Assume Complete

This post is not:

  • A final specification
  • A closed design
  • A complete implementation
  • An answer to all questions

This post is:

  • A snapshot of current state
  • A catalog of open questions
  • An invitation to explore directions
  • A permission to fork and experiment

The questions are not bugs. They’re features.

Open directions > Closed specifications.

Conclusion

What We Have

avs-node/ contains:

  • Working operator loop
  • Two verification strategies
  • Pattern learning primitives
  • Circuit compilation tools
  • Integration interfaces (not fully connected)

Status: Core functional. Integration open.

What We Need

Decisions on:

  • Verification composition
  • Pattern prioritization
  • Compilation strategy
  • Economic measurement
  • Multi-AVS scheduling

Status: Fork points identified. Choices yours.

What’s Next

From Post 704: Ask, don’t complete.

The open questions:

  1. How to compose verifiers?
  2. Which patterns first?
  3. Compilation strategy?
  4. Operator W measurement?
  5. Multi-AVS scheduler?
  6. State model?
  7. Pattern update triggers?

These aren’t blockers. They’re choices.

Fork. Experiment. Deploy. Learn.

Permissionless.

Architecture:

Verification:

Implementation:

Code:

AVS node = current-reality/avs-node/

Core functional. Integration open.

Fork points identified. Choices yours.

Open questions > Closed answers.

Permissionless infrastructure.

∞

Back to Gallery
View source on GitLab