feat: evidence composition — compile-time reference resolution for evidence sub-rules
CI / publish (push) Successful in 11s
CI / test (push) Successful in 15s

An evidence may now reference another derived evidence as a sub-rule
(WHEN can_read(user, doc) where can_read is itself an evidence). Resolution
is a compile-time linker pass: after every evidence config is generated, each
direct reference to an evidence is inlined with that evidence's own (resolved)
config, so the engine evaluates a fully-resolved, acyclic config tree.

- resolveEvidenceReferences(): post-generation pass over evidence configs,
  recursing into logical/defeasible containers (when/unless/never/always/
  requires/union/intersection), always.direct nests, and comparator operands.
- Forward references resolve (all configs exist before the pass runs).
- Cycles and self-references are compile-time errors.
- _subjectAsObject scoping is preserved through inlining.
- dependsOn is recomputed after resolution, so partial-graph requirements
  reach transitively through composed evidence.
- buildDirectRule/buildPredicateRule now apply subject-scoping to top-level
  PredicateCall evidence bodies (latent gap, previously missed).
- validation: reject relation names shared across facts/sources/evidence/
  measures (a collision silently overwrote configs and read as a false cycle).

Tests: EvidenceComposition (9), DSLRuntime transitive requiredFacts, oracle
campaign composition construct, illegal-mutations cycle + cross-kind cases.
This commit is contained in:
John Dvorak
2026-08-03 11:17:30 -07:00
parent 0a744329e6
commit 88f10f9db4
7 changed files with 371 additions and 42 deletions
+1 -1
View File
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"name": "@arbiter/evidence-dsl",
"version": "1.1.0",
"version": "1.2.0",
"description": "Evidence DSL v2 compiler: translates the natural Evidence DSL (ADR-000) into @arbiter/core relation configurations.",
"license": "ISC",
"type": "module",
+123 -39
View File
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
this.generatedRules = new Map();
this.errors = [];
this.dependencyIndex = new Map();
this.evidenceNames = new Set();
}
/**
@@ -38,6 +39,14 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
this.generateFactConfig(fact);
});
// Resolve evidence composition: a rule that references another derived
// evidence (WHEN can_read(user, doc) where can_read is an evidence) is
// lowered in place to that evidence's own config — compile-time inlining
// (a linker pass), so the engine evaluates a fully-resolved config tree
// and never needs a sub-query traversal mechanism. Forward references are
// handled because every evidence config is built before this pass runs.
this.resolveEvidenceReferences();
// Apply generated rules to arbiter
this.applyRulesToArbiter();
@@ -62,6 +71,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
*/
generateEvidenceRules(evidence) {
const relationName = evidence.name;
this.evidenceNames.add(relationName);
const ruleConfig = this.buildRuleConfig(evidence);
if (ruleConfig) {
@@ -162,6 +172,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
for (const child of ruleList) collect(child, targetSet);
}
if (node?.rule) collect(node.rule, targetSet);
if (node?.direct) collect(node.direct, targetSet);
}
};
@@ -274,7 +285,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
buildSingleStatementRule(statement, evidence) {
switch (statement.type) {
case 'DirectEvidence':
return this.buildDirectRule(statement);
return this.buildDirectRule(statement, evidence);
case 'PatternMatch':
return this.buildPatternMatchRule(statement, evidence);
case 'DefeasibleLogic':
@@ -282,7 +293,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
case 'Fusion':
return this.buildFusionRule(statement);
case 'PredicateCall':
return this.buildPredicateRule(statement);
return this.buildPredicateRule(statement, evidence);
case 'UnaryExpression':
return this.buildUnaryRule(statement);
case 'BinaryExpression':
@@ -291,7 +302,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
case 'Expression':
// Handle expressions that might be predicate calls
if (statement.type === 'PredicateCall') {
return this.buildPredicateRule(statement);
return this.buildPredicateRule(statement, evidence);
}
return this.buildRuleFromExpressionNode(statement, evidence);
default:
@@ -459,7 +470,7 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
* @param {DirectEvidenceNode} directEvidence - Direct evidence statement
* @returns {Object|null} Rule configuration or null
*/
buildDirectRule(directEvidence) {
buildDirectRule(directEvidence, evidence) {
if (!directEvidence.predicate) {
this.errors.push('Direct evidence must have a predicate');
return null;
@@ -467,12 +478,24 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
const predicate = directEvidence.predicate;
const relation = predicate.name;
return {
const rule = {
type: 'direct',
relation: relation,
reverse: false
};
// Subject-scoped (unary) call: the predicate call's args omit the
// evidence's object parameter (user_risk(user, 1) inside a binary
// evidence) → check the relation on the subject itself.
const evidenceParams = (evidence && evidence.params) || [];
const objectVar = evidenceParams[1] && evidenceParams[1].name;
const argName = a => a && (a.name !== undefined ? a.name : a.value);
if (objectVar !== undefined && !(predicate.arguments || []).some(a => argName(a) === objectVar)) {
rule._subjectAsObject = true;
}
return rule;
}
/**
@@ -925,9 +948,6 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
* @returns {Object|null} Rule configuration or null
*/
buildDirectRuleFromPredicate(predicate, evidence) {
const expanded = this._expandPredicate(predicate.name);
if (expanded) return expanded;
const rule = {
type: 'direct',
relation: predicate.name,
@@ -944,36 +964,105 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
return rule;
}
_expandPredicate(predicateName) {
const existingConfig = this.generatedRules.get(predicateName) || this.arbiter?.relationConfigs?.get(predicateName);
if (!existingConfig) return null;
if (!existingConfig.union && !existingConfig.intersection && !existingConfig.exclusion) return null;
_expandPredicate() {
// Replaced by resolveEvidenceReferences() (the compile-time evidence
// composition pass). Predicate references are now emitted as direct rules
// and inlined during resolution, which also handles forward references and
// preserves the correct _subjectAsObject scoping.
}
const logicalKey = existingConfig.union ? 'union' : existingConfig.intersection ? 'intersection' : 'exclusion';
const subRules = Array.isArray(existingConfig[logicalKey]?.rules)
? existingConfig[logicalKey].rules
: Array.isArray(existingConfig[logicalKey]) ? existingConfig[logicalKey] : [];
/**
* Evidence composition pass. Every rule that references a DERIVED evidence
* (e.g. `WHEN can_read(user, doc)` where can_read is itself an evidence) is
* rewritten to inline that evidence's own config. This runs after all
* evidence configs are generated, so forward references resolve; cycles are
* detected and reported. The engine therefore evaluates a fully-resolved,
* acyclic config tree — no runtime sub-query traversal is needed.
*/
resolveEvidenceReferences() {
for (const name of this.evidenceNames) {
if (!this.generatedRules.has(name)) continue;
const stack = new Set([name]);
const resolved = this._resolveRule(this.generatedRules.get(name), stack);
this.generatedRules.set(name, resolved);
this._annotateDependencies(name, resolved);
}
}
if (subRules.length === 0) return null;
/**
* Recursively rewrite a rule tree, inlining references to derived evidence
* configs. `stack` holds the evidence names currently being expanded so a
* cyclic reference (A → B → A) is detected and reported.
*/
_resolveRule(rule, stack) {
if (!rule || typeof rule !== 'object') return rule;
if (Array.isArray(rule)) return rule.map(r => this._resolveRule(r, stack));
const expandedRules = subRules.map(r => {
if (r && r.type === 'direct') return { type: 'direct', relation: r.relation, reverse: !!r.reverse };
if (typeof r === 'string') return { type: 'direct', relation: r, reverse: false };
return null;
}).filter(Boolean);
// Direct rule referencing a derived evidence → inline its resolved config.
if (rule.type === 'direct' && rule.relation) {
const ref = rule.relation;
if (this.evidenceNames.has(ref)) {
const referencedConfig = this.generatedRules.get(ref);
if (referencedConfig) {
if (stack.has(ref)) {
this.errors.push(`Cyclic evidence reference involving '${ref}'. Evidence composition must be acyclic.`);
return rule;
}
const refStack = new Set(stack);
refStack.add(ref);
const resolvedRef = this._resolveRule(referencedConfig, refStack);
if (resolvedRef) {
const clone = this._deepCloneRule(resolvedRef);
if (rule._subjectAsObject) clone._subjectAsObject = true;
return clone;
}
}
}
return rule;
}
if (expandedRules.length === 0) return null;
// Recurse into logical / defeasible / nested containers: rule-lists
// (union/intersection/exclusion/never/requires/when/unless .rules) and
// single nested rules (always.direct, comparator operands).
const out = { ...rule };
for (const key of ['union', 'intersection', 'exclusion', 'never', 'always', 'requires', 'when', 'unless', 'direct', 'rule']) {
const node = out[key];
if (!node || typeof node !== 'object') continue;
if (Array.isArray(node)) {
out[key] = node.map(r => this._resolveRule(r, stack));
continue;
}
const next = { ...node };
if (Array.isArray(next.rules)) {
next.rules = next.rules.map(r => this._resolveRule(r, stack));
}
if (next.union && Array.isArray(next.union.rules)) {
next.union = { ...next.union, rules: next.union.rules.map(r => this._resolveRule(r, stack)) };
}
if (next.intersection && Array.isArray(next.intersection.rules)) {
next.intersection = { ...next.intersection, rules: next.intersection.rules.map(r => this._resolveRule(r, stack)) };
}
if (next.direct && typeof next.direct === 'object') {
next.direct = this._resolveRule(next.direct, stack);
}
if (next.rule && typeof next.rule === 'object') {
next.rule = this._resolveRule(next.rule, stack);
}
out[key] = next;
}
if (out.type === 'relational_comparator') {
if (out.left?.rule) out.left = { ...out.left, rule: this._resolveRule(out.left.rule, stack) };
if (out.right?.rule) out.right = { ...out.right, rule: this._resolveRule(out.right.rule, stack) };
}
return out;
}
return {
type: 'logical',
[logicalKey]: {
rules: expandedRules,
aggregator: existingConfig[logicalKey]?.aggregator || 'min'
},
// Flag to tell the evaluator: this expanded sub-predicate is unary —
// use the subject as the object instead of inheriting the parent's object.
_subjectAsObject: true
};
_deepCloneRule(rule) {
try {
return structuredClone(rule);
} catch {
return JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(rule));
}
}
/**
@@ -1120,11 +1209,6 @@ export class RuleGenerator {
return this.buildChallengeRule(expression, null);
}
// Expand composite (logical) predicate references into their direct
// leaf components so the optimizer can flatten to a correct direct_list.
const expanded = this._expandPredicate(predicateName);
if (expanded) return expanded;
const rule = {
type: 'direct',
relation: predicateName,
+32
View File
@@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ export function validateDslText(dslText, options = {}) {
validateSources(program, tables, errors, warnings, dslText);
validateMeasures(program, tables, errors, warnings, dslText);
validateEvidence(program, tables, errors, warnings, dslText);
validateCrossKindRelationNames(program, errors, warnings, dslText);
return {
success: errors.length === 0,
@@ -335,6 +336,37 @@ function validateEvidence(program, tables, errors, warnings, source) {
}
}
/**
* Relation names must be unique across facts, sources, evidence, and measures.
* A fact and an evidence sharing a name would silently overwrite each other's
* relation config during generation (and read as a false cyclic reference).
*/
function validateCrossKindRelationNames(program, errors, warnings, source) {
const seen = new Map();
const kinds = [
['fact', program.facts],
['source', program.sources],
['evidence', program.evidence],
['measure', program.measures]
];
for (const [kind, items] of kinds) {
for (const item of items || []) {
const prev = seen.get(item.name);
if (prev) {
errors.push(createError({
message: `Name '${item.name}' is already used by a ${prev} declaration.`,
rule: 'Relation names must be unique across facts, sources, evidence, and measures.',
fix: `Rename the ${kind} or the ${prev} to a unique name.`,
location: findLocation(source, `${kind} ${item.name}`),
context: formatContext(source, findLocation(source, item.name))
}));
} else {
seen.set(item.name, kind);
}
}
}
}
function validateEvidenceBody(body, scope, tables, errors, warnings, source, parent) {
for (const stmt of body.statements || []) {
switch (stmt.type) {
+27
View File
@@ -161,4 +161,31 @@ describe('DSLRuntime', () => {
rt.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc', {});
await assert.rejects(() => rt.check('u:1', 'does_not_exist', 'doc:9'), /unknown relation/);
});
it('derives transitive required facts through evidence composition', async () => {
const dsl = `
definition Employee { id: string }
definition Doc { id: string }
fact *owns(user: Employee, doc: Doc)
fact *banned(user: Employee)
evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_open(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { WHEN can_read(user, doc) UNLESS banned(user) }
`;
const rt = new DSLRuntime(new Arbiter()).compile(dsl, 'rt-comp');
rt.addNode('u:1', 'Employee', {});
rt.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc', {});
// can_open composes can_read, so its requirements reach through to owns.
assert.deepEqual(rt.requiredFacts('can_open'), ['owns', 'banned']);
const granted = await rt.check('u:1', 'can_open', 'doc:9', {
factProviders: { owns: async () => 0.9, banned: async () => 0 }
});
assert.equal(granted.possibility, 0.9);
assert.equal(granted.reason, 'allow_rule_matched');
assert.deepEqual(granted.providedFacts, ['owns', 'banned']);
const denied = await rt.check('u:1', 'can_open', 'doc:9', {
factProviders: { owns: async () => 0.9, banned: async () => 1 }
});
assert.equal(denied.possibility, 0);
assert.equal(denied.reason, 'defeated_by_unless');
});
});
+154
View File
@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
/**
* tests/EvidenceComposition.test.js — referencing a derived evidence as a
* sub-rule of another evidence (WHEN can_read(user, doc) where can_read is
* itself an evidence).
*
* Composition is resolved at COMPILE time: the generator inlines each
* evidence reference with the referenced evidence's own config (a linker
* pass that handles forward references and rejects cycles), so the engine
* evaluates a fully-resolved, acyclic config tree.
*/
import { describe, it } from 'node:test';
import assert from 'node:assert/strict';
import { Arbiter } from '@arbiter/core';
import { DSLCompiler } from '../src/DSLCompiler.js';
const DEFS = `
definition Employee { id: string }
definition Group { id: string }
definition Doc { id: string }
fact owns(user: Employee, doc: Doc)
fact *trusted(user: Employee)
fact member_of(user: Employee, group: Group)
fact can_access(group: Group, doc: Doc)
`;
function compile(dsl, name = 'compose') {
const arb = new Arbiter();
const compiler = new DSLCompiler(arb);
const result = compiler.compile(dsl, name);
return { arb, result };
}
describe('Evidence composition', () => {
it('composes a direct evidence into another evidence', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_browse(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_read(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'owns', 'doc:9', { possibility: 0.8 });
const res = arb.check('u:1', 'can_browse', 'doc:9');
assert.equal(res.possibility, 0.8);
// The reference is inlined to the underlying fact config.
assert.equal(arb.relationConfigs.get('can_browse').type, 'direct');
assert.equal(arb.relationConfigs.get('can_browse').relation, 'owns');
});
it('composes an evidence inside a defeasible WHEN/UNLESS', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_open(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { WHEN can_read(user, doc) UNLESS trusted(user) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'owns', 'doc:9', { possibility: 0.9 });
assert.equal(arb.check('u:1', 'can_open', 'doc:9').possibility, 0.9);
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'trusted', 'u:1', { possibility: 1.0 });
const denied = arb.check('u:1', 'can_open', 'doc:9');
assert.equal(denied.possibility, 0);
assert.equal(denied.reason, 'defeated_by_unless');
});
it('composes a chain evidence into another evidence', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence can_enter(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { member_of(user, *g) { can_access(g, doc) } }
evidence can_work(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_enter(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('g:1', 'Group'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'member_of', 'g:1', { possibility: 1.0 });
arb.addRelation('g:1', 'can_access', 'doc:9', { possibility: 0.7 });
const res = arb.check('u:1', 'can_work', 'doc:9');
assert.equal(res.possibility, 0.7);
assert.equal(arb.relationConfigs.get('can_work').type, 'chain');
});
it('composes transitively (A → B → fact) and re-derives dependencies', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_browse(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_read(user, doc) }
evidence can_open(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_browse(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'owns', 'doc:9', { possibility: 0.6 });
assert.equal(arb.check('u:1', 'can_open', 'doc:9').possibility, 0.6);
assert.deepEqual(arb.relationConfigs.get('can_open').dependsOn, ['owns']);
});
it('composes a value-carrying evidence and preserves subject-as-object scope', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
fact *user_risk(user: Employee, value: number)
evidence risk_ok(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { user_risk(user, 1) }
evidence can_proceed(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { risk_ok(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'user_risk', 'u:1', { possibility: 1.0, value: 1 });
const res = arb.check('u:1', 'can_proceed', 'doc:9');
assert.equal(res.possibility, 1);
});
it('composes evidence inside a comparator operand', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
fact *user_risk(user: Employee, value: number)
fact *risk_limit(doc: Doc, value: number)
evidence user_risk_ok(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { user_risk(user, 1) }
evidence can_proceed(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { user_risk_ok(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success, JSON.stringify(result.errors));
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'user_risk', 'u:1', { possibility: 1.0, value: 1 });
assert.equal(arb.check('u:1', 'can_proceed', 'doc:9').possibility, 1);
});
it('rejects cyclic evidence references at compile time', () => {
const { result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence a(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { b(user, doc) }
evidence b(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { a(user, doc) }
`);
assert.equal(result.success, false);
assert.ok(result.errors.some(e => /[Cc]yclic/.test(e)), JSON.stringify(result.errors));
});
it('rejects self-referencing evidence at compile time', () => {
const { result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence a(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { a(user, doc) }
`);
assert.equal(result.success, false);
assert.ok(result.errors.some(e => /[Cc]yclic/.test(e)), JSON.stringify(result.errors));
});
it('keeps the referenced evidence checkable in its own right', () => {
const { arb, result } = compile(`
${DEFS}
evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_browse(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_read(user, doc) }
`);
assert.ok(result.success);
arb.addNode('u:1', 'Employee'); arb.addNode('doc:9', 'Doc');
arb.addRelation('u:1', 'owns', 'doc:9', { possibility: 0.5 });
assert.equal(arb.check('u:1', 'can_read', 'doc:9').possibility, 0.5);
assert.equal(arb.check('u:1', 'can_browse', 'doc:9').possibility, 0.5);
});
});
+19 -2
View File
@@ -106,11 +106,28 @@ function buildProgram(kind, ps) {
oracle = pG * pM;
break;
}
case 'composition': {
// can_via composes the direct evidence can_read, which reads the owns
// edge — an evidence-in-evidence reference resolved at compile time.
const [pOwn] = ps;
evidence = `evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }
evidence can_via(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_read(user, doc) }`;
edges.push({ src: 'u:1', relation: 'owns', dst: 'doc:9', possibility: pOwn });
oracle = pOwn;
break;
}
default:
throw new Error(`unknown construct: ${kind}`);
}
return { dsl: FACTS + evidence, edges, oracle, relation: evidence.match(/evidence (\w+)/)[1] };
return {
dsl: FACTS + evidence,
edges,
oracle,
// Check the LAST evidence declaration: the composition construct declares
// two evidences (can_read + can_via), and the composed one is the target.
relation: [...evidence.matchAll(/evidence\s+(\w+)/g)].at(-1)[1]
};
}
function runCheck({ kind, ps }) {
@@ -134,7 +151,7 @@ function runCheck({ kind, ps }) {
}
const CONSTRUCTS = ['direct', 'chain', 'tuple_to_userset', 'fusion_min', 'fusion_max',
'when_unless', 'never_always', 'requires_when'];
'when_unless', 'never_always', 'requires_when', 'composition'];
describe('DSL generative oracle parity (rigor)', () => {
it('generated legal DSL compiles and every check matches the oracle', async () => {
+15
View File
@@ -81,6 +81,21 @@ const MUTATIONS = {
desc: 'evidence declared with mismatched parameter arity',
mustFail: true,
apply: () => VALID_DSL.replace('evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }', 'evidence can_read(user: Employee) { owns(user, doc) }')
},
cyclic_evidence_ref: {
desc: 'two evidences referencing each other (cycle)',
mustFail: true,
apply: () => VALID_DSL + `
evidence can_cyc_a(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_cyc_b(user, doc) }
evidence can_cyc_b(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { can_cyc_a(user, doc) }`
},
cross_kind_collision: {
desc: 'fact and evidence sharing a relation name',
mustFail: true,
apply: () => VALID_DSL.replace(
'evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }',
'fact can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc)\n evidence can_read(user: Employee, doc: Doc) { owns(user, doc) }'
)
}
};