Research Architecture//Authority Lifecycle Governance

_

AUTHREX Systems develops governance infrastructure that controls how autonomous systems receive, use, degrade, and recover authority in high-risk environments.

7
Governance Frameworks
4
USPTO Patents
23
Publications
The Problem

Intelligence is scaling.
Control is not.

Autonomous systems are making decisions faster than humans can supervise. The industry is optimizing for intelligence while the governance layer remains absent.

Without structured authority governance, systems operate with unconstrained delegation. No mechanism for degrading authority when trust erodes, no protocol for recovering control when autonomy fails.

AUTHREX addresses this as an engineering problem — not a policy aspiration.

WHY NOW

The DoD's Replicator Initiative is scaling autonomous mass across every domain. The Collaborative Combat Aircraft program is fielding AI wingmen alongside human pilots. Both demand governance infrastructure that does not yet exist — the gap between DoDD 3000.09's safety mandates and operational autonomy at scale is widening with every deployment cycle.

The Solution

One Unified Governance Architecture

AUTHREX SYSTEMS is a research program developing authority governance infrastructure — frameworks, hardware designs, and simulations operating under a single integrated architecture.

AUTHREX SYSTEM
UNIFIED AUTHORITY GOVERNANCE ARCHITECTURE
RESEARCH FRAMEWORK

A single integrated research architecture combining seven governance frameworks, four hardware platform designs, and twelve browser-based simulations — providing end-to-end authority lifecycle control for autonomous systems across defense, maritime, infrastructure, and autonomous vehicle domains.

7
FRAMEWORKS
4
BLADE PLATFORMS
12
SIMULATIONS
5
DOMAINS
4
PATENTS
SYSTEM TOPOLOGY — INTEGRATION MAP
AUTHREX SYSTEM Governance Pipeline 7 frameworks SATA → HMAA → ... → ERAM BLADE Hardware 4 platforms EDGE · MARITIME · INFRA · AV Simulations 12 environments 5 domains · browser-based computes executes validates ← cross-validated →
GOVERNANCE PIPELINE
7 PUBLISHED
Authority Lifecycle Frameworks
Seven-stage pipeline governing trust computation, authority allocation, deception filtering, consensus, deliberation, recovery, and escalation monitoring.
SATA
Sensor trust fusion
HMAA
Authority allocation
ADARA
Deception filtering
MAIVA
Byzantine consensus
FLAME
Deliberation gate
CARA
Recovery cascade
ERAM
Escalation monitor
HARDWARE PLATFORMS
4 DESIGNED
BLADE Family Architecture
Domain-specific hardware governance nodes with BOM-specified components, interface control documents, and FPGA bitstream integration.
BLADE-EDGE
Directed energy · 72 components · $139K
BLADE-MARITIME
Maritime surveillance · 84 components · $43K
BLADE-INFRA
Critical infrastructure · 92 components · $12K
BLADE-AV
Autonomous vehicle · 62 components · $16K
SIMULATION PORTFOLIO
12 VALIDATED
Validation & Demonstration
Browser-based computational simulations validating each framework independently and in integrated scenarios across five operational domains.
DEFENSE
Fratricide · swarm · directed energy
MARITIME
GPS spoofing · patrol governance
INFRASTRUCTURE
SCADA · command injection
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
Sensor degradation · convoy
ROBOTICS
Rover · UAV testbeds
PIPELINE → HARDWARE
Frameworks execute on BLADE nodes
HARDWARE → SIMULATION
Platforms validate through simulation
SIMULATION → PIPELINE
Simulations prove the governance logic
Why This Matters

Authority governance failures have real consequences

Between 1983 and 2026, documented incidents involving misidentification, sensor-trust collapse, rushed escalation, and coordination failures have caused hundreds of casualties.

AUTHREX is designed to reduce the probability of exactly these classes of failures.

Adversarial Threat Taxonomy — Framework Coverage Matrix
SATA HMAA ADARA MAIVA FLAME CARA ERAM ADV. LEVEL

● = primary defense   ◐ = contributing defense   Adversary capability: sophistication level required to execute threat class

Documented Authority Governance Failures (1983–2026)

Sources: CENTCOM, ICAO, GAO, CNAS, DoD investigations. All publicly documented. ALIGN = framework alignment to documented failure mode (HIGH = strong match to 3+ frameworks; MED = partial match).

Operational Impact
What AUTHREX is designed to prevent
Misidentification-based engagement under sensor ambiguity
Flash escalation before human verification
Authority persistence after trust degradation
Consensus collapse in multi-agent coordination
Autonomous action without deliberation under uncertainty
Navigation corruption from adversarial spoofing
Each failure class maps directly to documented incidents (1983–2026) and is addressed by specific framework combinations in the AUTHREX pipeline.
Governance Architecture

Seven-Stage Authority Lifecycle

End-to-end pipeline governing trust, authority, constraints, consensus, deliberation, recovery, and escalation.

SYSTEM ARCHITECTURE // DATA FLOW & FEEDBACK LOOPS
FORWARD RECOVERY MONITORING
CONTINUOUS MONITORING LAYER DECEPTION → FORCE DELAY CARA → SATA TRUST RE-EVALUATION RISK CALIBRATION SATA SENSE τ fusion HMAA ASSIGN ADARA CONSTRAIN MAIVA AGGREGATE BFT vote FLAME DELIBERATE latency gate CARA RECOVER deterministic ERAM MONITOR SENSORS ACTION
PARALLEL EXECUTION
SATA feeds HMAA and ADARA simultaneously — authority and deception analysis run in parallel, not sequentially
RECOVERY FEEDBACK
CARA recovery feeds back to SATA for trust re-evaluation — closed-loop control, not one-shot pipeline
CONTINUOUS MONITORING
ERAM monitors all stages simultaneously and feeds risk calibration back to HMAA authority computation
Subsystem Demonstrations

Framework Proof of Computation

Live computational demonstrations of all seven AUTHREX frameworks operating independently — showing the math, the logic, and the real-time behavior of each subsystem.

[ SIMULATED SUBSYSTEM COMPUTATION ]

HMAA // AUTHORITY COMPUTATION MATRIX
HMAA Authority Output: A = f(Q, C, E, τ)
0.82
FULL AUTONOMY PERMITTED
⚠ DECISION THRESHOLD CROSSED
Q C E τ HMAA ENGINE EXECUTE
SATA // SENSOR TRUST FUSION
LiDAR Array99%
Optical ISR96%
GPS/INS98%
COMPOSITE TRUST
0.97
ADARA // DECEPTION FILTER
ANALYZING KINEMATICSTRACK VALID
MAIVA // KINETIC SWARM CONSENSUS SIMULATED
BYZANTINE FAULT ISOLATED: UAV-03
ERAM // ESCALATION TRAJECTORY CARA STANDBY
Active Subroutines
FLAME // DELIBERATION GATE
IDLE
WAITING FOR ACTION SIGNAL
CARA // RECOVERY CASCADE
1. FULL AUTONOMY
2. SUPERVISED (HUMAN-IN-LOOP)
3. SAFE LOITER (HOLD POSITION)
4. RETURN TO BASE (RTB)
Operational Simulations

Mission Environment Scenarios

Five operational scenarios across air, ground, sea, and infrastructure domains — each showing what happens without governance vs. with AUTHREX authority control.

[ ALL SCENARIOS ARE SIMULATED ENVIRONMENTS — NOT FIELDED SYSTEMS ]

Evidence Layer

Research artifacts, not marketing claims

Every component backed by published research, reproducible simulations, and documented engineering specifications.

Simulated Performance Characteristics
HMAA DECISION LATENCY
<12ms
Authority computation cycle (simulated)
MAIVA BFT THRESHOLD
f<n/3
Byzantine tolerance: 2 of 5 nodes max
FLAME MIN DELIBERATION
3.0s
Configurable: 1.5s–30s by mission class
CARA RECOVERY TIME
<2.2s
Full cascade: Autonomy → RTB (simulated)

All metrics are simulated values from browser-based validation environments. Hardware-validated metrics pending BLADE platform assembly.

Verification & Validation (V&V) Protocol
From Simulation to Physical Proof

Each governance framework undergoes a four-stage verification pipeline designed to meet MIL-STD-882E safety-critical requirements — progressing from computational validation through formal mathematical proof to physical hardware execution.

Formal Methods Verification
TLA+ state-space modeling applied to MAIVA consensus and FLAME deliberation logic. The rover testbed baseline includes 200,000 FSM conformance comparisons proving absence of unsafe states.
Monte Carlo Validation
Statistical validation across randomized initial conditions and adversarial injection scenarios. The HMAA-UAV simulation executes 6DOF physics with EKF2 state estimation under six distinct attack vectors.
Hardware-in-the-Loop (HITL)
SATA-FLAME governance bitstream commissioning on Zynq UltraScale+ FPGAs. Validates deterministic latency and recovery behavior against live corrupted sensor injections.
Physical Testbed Validation
Rover and UAV platforms executing governance pipelines in physical environments. 42-file Python engineering baseline with 98 tests and TLA+ formal specification.
V&V ESCALATION PIPELINE
1. COMPUTATIONAL SIMULATIONCURRENT
2. FORMAL LOGIC VERIFICATIONIN PROGRESS
3. HARDWARE-IN-THE-LOOP (HITL)Q3 2026
4. PHYSICAL TESTBED FLIGHT/DRIVEQ4 2026
ALIGNED WITH MIL-STD-882E · NIST AI RMF · DoDD 3000.09 · ISO 26262 · NERC CIP · IEC 61850
Publications & Technical Deposits (DOI-Verified)
TITLE VENUE DOI DOMAIN
Mission

Human authority must be engineered into autonomous systems — not assumed.

This research program exists because the gap between autonomous capability and authority governance is widening. Current approaches treat control as a policy overlay. AUTHREX treats it as an engineering problem.

The governance architecture provides the operational mechanisms for assigning, monitoring, degrading, revoking, and recovering authority in high-speed autonomous environments.

This is not AI safety in the abstract. This is control engineering research for real systems operating under real constraints.

Principal Researcher
Burak Oktenli
MPS Applied Intelligence (STEM) — Georgetown University
MBA International Business — Lynn University
B.Sc. Computer Science Engineering (STEM) — University of South Florida
IEEE Member
ORCID: 0009-0001-8573-1667
Provisional Patents (USPTO)
63/999,105 — HMAA Authority Allocation
64/000,170 — CARA Recovery Architecture
64/002,453 — SATA Sensor Trust Anchoring
64/005,607 — FLAME Escalation Latency
Standards & Policy Alignment
DoDD 3000.09
Autonomy in Weapon Systems — human judgment requirements, failure minimization
NIST AI RMF 1.0
AI Risk Management Framework — context-dependent governance, risk measurement
MIL-STD-882E
System Safety — hazard analysis, risk assessment, safety-critical design
Dual-Use Application

The same governance pipeline that prevents catastrophic failures in military systems directly addresses high-liability scenarios in commercial autonomous operations.

DEFENSE APPLICATION
FRAMEWORK
COMMERCIAL APPLICATION
Fratricide prevention in autonomous munitions under EW spoofing
SATA + ADARA
Autonomous trucking: forced human override during sensor degradation on highways
UAV swarm coordination under Byzantine node compromise
MAIVA
Warehouse robot fleets: isolating malfunctioning units without halting operations
Maritime patrol vessel GPS spoofing into foreign territorial waters
ADARA + ERAM
Commercial shipping: preventing spoofing-induced rerouting losses and piracy exposure
Power grid SCADA command injection during contested operations
FLAME + CARA
Industrial SCADA: mandatory deliberation before automated load-shedding in energy grids
Strategic Roadmap — 18-Month Horizon
Q2 2026 — CURRENT
Foundation Complete
7 governance frameworks published · 4 provisional patents filed · 4 BLADE hardware platforms designed (BOM-specified) · 12 browser simulations validated · 23 DOI-verified publications · Rover + UAV testbeds documented
Q3 2026
Hardware Assembly & Patent Conversion
BLADE-EDGE prototype assembly begins · Provisional-to-utility patent conversion initiated (4 applications) · FPGA governance bitstream RTL commissioning · Physical UAV testbed flight validation
Q4 2026
Integrated Testing & SBIR Submission
SATA-FLAME pipeline executing on FPGA hardware (TRL 4→5) · SBIR Phase II proposal submission · BLADE-MARITIME hardware integration · Rover testbed governance validation campaign
Q1–Q2 2027
TRL 6 Target & Research Partnerships
Multi-framework governance validated on physical hardware (TRL 5→6) · Utility patents granted (projected) · Research partnership or CRADA engagement (planned) · BLADE-AV autonomous vehicle integration testing
TRL PROGRESSION: 2–3 → 6 OVER 18 MONTHS
CURRENT: TRL 2–4 TARGET: TRL 6
Explore the research
Publications, simulations, and technical specifications at burakoktenli.com
View Portfolio →
RESEARCH INQUIRIES
LINKEDIN
linkedin.com/in/burakoktenli
ORCID
0009-0001-8573-1667