The Concept of KIRIK - the Semantic MetaProtocolVitaly Gumirov, Pyotr MatyukovJune 8th, 20181 IntroductionKIRIK is a meta protocol powered by semantic smart contracts.Principal Advantages of KIRIK TechnologySemantic smart contracts hereinafter K are based on Semantic modelingTheory [6];It brings together di erent Blockchain plats;It also brings together di erent AI and machine learning technologies.1.1 Semantic smart contractsThe KIRIK concept is not based on Blockchain as the distributed ledger, but onsemantic smart contracts K which are not linked to any speci c blockchainplat. Semantic smart contracts allow to specify protocols that can bind oper-ations and transactions made in di erent Blockchain plats and other externalsystems, like banks or exchanges, into one distributed transaction. From the Math-ematical Logic’s al point of view a semantic smart contract represents a altheory that has a property of constructivism, which means that, for example,any expression in the of 0-ula can be veri ed whether it is true or falsein a certain constructive model of that theory.11.2 Oracles or base predicatesKIRIK plat is based on the idea of declarative speci cations, where logicalulas with certain restrictions a.k.a. 0-ulas, see below are used thatalso allow to call external functions so called oracles or base predicates. Seman-tic contract represents as does a common contract declarative expressed usingcommon logic speci cations of predicates and rules. Such oracles are usually rep-resented by some external systems like micro-services, or by semantic predicatesde ned by some other semantic contract.1.3 Convergence of di erent blockchainsParticularly a semantic contract can use external oracles to specify the protocollogic for binding together transactions between di erent Blockchain plats to a single transaction. For instance, smart contracts based on Ethereum, NEO,and/or RSK/Bitcoin can play a role of such external oracles for KIRIK basedsemantic contracts. Two-step transaction registration is used for speeding up theprocess. KIRIK transactions are anchored onto IOTA distributed ledger and thenonto KIRIK Blockchain which is based on a fork of the Ethereum source code.This allows on the one hand to remove barriers for scaling up a network of nodespering semantic contract calculations, and on the other hand use the reliableand proven security algorithms of Ethereum.1.4 Semantic domainsAdditionally, the KIRIK concept allows for creation of distinct domains of smartcontracts and/or oracles with their own distributed ledgers for transaction anchor-ing. This is required to enhance scalability. This also allows organizations andcommunities to use semantic contracts and at the same time anchor transactionsonto their own Blockchain, or other transaction logs. For instance, a bankingassociation can create a distributed semantic contract network of its own with an-choring onto its private, or permissioned Blockchain. Banks can open their servicesfor their clients in the of oracles some of their semantic contracts.1.5 Scienti c foundation of semantic smart contractsThe KIRIK concept is based on the foundation of Semantic Programming/modelingTheory introduced by the group of world known mathematicians Sergey S. Gon-charov, Yuri L. Yershov, and Dmitry I. Sviridenko representing Siberian school ofmathematical logic. [1][2] [3]2Strong scienti c background open huge opportunities and areas of applicationsfor semantic contracts ranging from AI 2.0 to decentralized marketplaces, to legallybound smart contracts and to smart wallets.KIRIK is based on the groundwork made by Eyeline.mobi Group, MiniApps.pro,LibrettoLabs, and the Sobolev’s Institute of Mathematics - Siberian Branch ofRussian Academy of Science.2 Semantic modeling languages -languagesThe typical approach to software development is dividing the development intostages1. Objective-setting, ulation of the vision concept.It is made by a specialist of the subject domain in cooperation with thecustomer2. Writing speci cations technical requirements.Again, this is made by the specialist of the subject domain3. Projecting and planning.This is done by a architect and a project manager4. Programming.This is made by programmers and engineers5. al acceptance testingNaturally, misinterpretation of ination occurs when the project moves fromthe previous stage to the next, as di erent specialists are involved at di erentstages. To mitigate this misinterpretations various special s are used, suchas Capability Maturity Model, SCRUM, Rational Uni ed Process, etc.The idea of cutable speci cations is the the cornerstone of semantic model-ing programming. A specialist of a subject domain can ulate speci cationsusing the semantic speci cation language, and these speci cations will then au-tomatically be converted into cutable code. It is important to note that thesemantic speci cation language supposes that the sense semantics of these spec-i cations is intelligible to the specialist of the subject domain. This allows tominimize the risk connected with misinterpretation of the ination becauseprogrammers, architects, and managers are excluded from the process and, whichis essential, dramatically expedite the process of result achievement and reduceman-hours and overall expenses.3The concept of semantic modeling programming was introduced and devel-oped in 1980’s by world known specialists of Mathematical Logic, academiciansSergey S. Goncharov, Yuri L. Yershov, and Dmitry I. Sviridenko in the Instituteof Mathematics, the Siberian Branch of Academy of Science of the USSR nowRussian Academy of Sciences.The concept of semantic modeling is based upon speci cations created usinglogical ulas with certain restrictions e.g. -ulas, or 0-ulas. Theserestrictions allow to implement automatic translation of speci cations into com-puter cutable code. Besides, semantic models are, in some sense, not Turingcomplete, which means the theoretical possibility of their automated veri cationthat is inferring from GES Theory [2][3]. From the practical point of view, how-ever, a notion of semantic contract veri er is suggested see below that will allowto present the semantics to the semantic contract users in a more obvious ,and e ectively verify it at the same time.In the general case di erent semantic speci cation languages can be used fordi erent problems/subject domains, each having its own syntax adapted to thespeci c class of problems. The only common requirement is equivalence and en-capsulation of such language into the language of -ulas, or its subset { thelanguage of 0-ulas.2.1 0-ulasLet us give the de nition of 0-ulas of a certain signature .hP;v;ciwhere P { is a set of predicate symbols, v { a set of symbols denoting variables,c { a set of symbols denoting constants.De nition 2.1 0-ulas1. If Pi { predicate symbol i.e. Pi2P and v1;;vn { variables,then Piv1;;vn { 0-ula2. If ; { 0-ulas,then ; _ ; ; { 0-ulas3. If { 0-ula and x { variable and l { nite list,then 8x2l x and 9x2l x { 0-ulasNote that in general a function is a particular case of predicate. It is relativelysimple to de ne the variant of 0-ulas language with functions, terms, lists,4and sorts. Conservative enrichment of 0-ulas language is possible, includingenrichment with object-oriented tools [7]. For the sake of simplicity this articleconsiders the simplest variant of semantic modeling language in the sense of 0-ulas de nition given above.2.2 Semantic ModelsSemantic model is a model of the subject domain speci ed as a set of 0-ulas.From the al point of view this set is equivalent of conjunction of all these0-ulas. Each of the 0-ulas is the axiom of the theory in the sense ofMathematical Logic. Therefore, on the one hand the semantic model is a theoryof the subject domain, on the other hand it has a corresponding model in thetheoretic-model sense, where this theory is true.2.3 Visual Notation, Block DiagramsSoftware development industry widely uses a so called use-case modeling for spec-i cations.A general use-case consists of one or several scenarios. These scenarios areenabled when certain conditions are met. These conditions are for simplicityare usually mutually exclusive. The conditions are normally set in the of0-ulas. The scenario represents a sequence of simple actions with minimumbranching that is often speci ed as a block diagram and/or so called activitydiagrams. This approach allows at the early stage of objective-setting to de nespeci cations in the most suitable for subject domain specialists to analyseand discuss the requirements with the programmers, or analysts.In KIRIK we plan to implement a visual notation based on block diagramsand use-case models that will be equivalent to a subset of 0-ulas. Thatwill allow to use this notation to specify semantic contracts. Our certainty aboutgood prospects of this notation rests on the fact that use-case modeling and blockdiagrams have acquired a reputation of very simple and e ective specifying tools.The aspects of visual modeling notation for semantic contracts and the theo-retical substantiation of this approach will be assessed in a separate article.2.4 LibrettinoLibrettino is a declarative subset of object-oriented programming language Li-bretto. It was developed by LibrettoLabs company led by A. Mantsivoda. Libret-tino is based on 0-ulas, ergo is a semantic modeling language. To learn moreabout Librettino and its procedural semantic, please refer to [4], [5].52.5 DSL’s domain speci c languagesThis concept can provide ground for special semantic modeling languages equiva-lent to 0-ulas to be used in various subject domains. For instance, it can bean object-oriented layer built above 0-ulas, or a layer that supports SQL forcreating semantic models, whose predicates are e ectuated through table struc-tures of relational databases.3 K - Semantic Smart ContractsFirst, let us give a de nition for a Semantic Smart Contract hereinafter SemanticContract, or simply K.De nition 3.1 Semantic Contract We call Semantic Smart Contract a group ofthree 1 a nite set of new predicate de nitions Defs, 2 a nite set of rulesRules, and 3 the veri er V K hDefs;Rules;Vi;1. where Defs consists of non-recursive predicate de nitions of the kindPjx1;;xn def x1;;xn;where x1;;xn { 0-ula;2. where Rules { is a set of 0-ulas of signature [fPjg, where fPjg { ispredicate symbols de ned in the given semantic contract K, in other wordsPj 2Defs;3. where V { is a 0-ula of signature [fPjg.Veri er V plays an important role in the semantic contract concept. Veri eris required to verify reasonability of the given semantic contract in the followingsenseA semantic contract user K can omit veri cation of de nitions and rulesand con ne oneself to veri cation of the veri er in order to understand thegist/sense semantics of the semantic contract.Prior to publication of a semantic contract KIRIC calculates its veri er V.Publication is allowed if and only if the result of the veri er calculation givestrue true.6When a new version of the K semantic contract is to be published, truthveri cation of its older version veri ers should also be made.Of course, in a particular case the veri er can be a tautology, e.g. true, or1 1. However, a semantic contract with such veri er will cause distrust amongusers. In an extreme case a veri er can be a conjunction of all rules Rules. Itwould make sense, however, to specify the veri er as a logical ula that clearlydemonstrates K’s sense/semantics to its potential users4 P - Basic Predicates, OraclesDe nition 4.1 Basic predicates functions are the predicates that can beused in a semantic contract and are de ned beyond the scope of that contract.The term oracle can act as a synonym of basic predicate in a sense. KIRIK supportsthe following types of basic predicates1. Built-in basic predicates/functions. They are present in the built-in libraryand available in the local address space of the node handling KIRIK semanticcontracts.2. External web services. Anyone can build a KIRIK compatible web servicethat can be used in semantic contracts as the basic predicate.3. Smart contracts. Ethereum, NEO, RSK, and other plats with smartcontract support.4. -predicates, de ned by other semantic contracts.5 N { Semantic NodeDe nition 5.1 Semantic Node N is a computing node that handles requeststo semantic contracts.The semantic node source code will be open. It will be ported to server anddesktop plats, as well as mobile devices.Semantic nodes are connected to a network where semantic contracts arepublished and cuted by the nodes of this network. A network consisting ofsemantic nodes is called Semantic Domain and denoted i.The semantic node owner is a participant of the network, who runs the semanticnode program on their equipment. Rewards for cution of requests to semantic7nodes, transaction archive keeping, and storage of semantic contract code areowners’ motivation to participate.The reward is paid in units called dynamo and denoted from Greek Shma-siologik d namh { semantic power. Dynamo is analogue to a gas in Ethereumor NEO. For details see section Dynamo.6 - Semantic DomainsDe nition 6.1 Semantic Domain is a set of semantic contracts and a setnetwork of semantic nodes that can cute these semantic contractshf Kig;f NjgiSemantic domains can have open or closed network of nodes. If the network isopen, anyone can join the domain and run their node on that network. The closeddomain means that the domain operator master grants permissions for joiningthe network.Besides, semantic domain can be centralised or decentralised. In the centraliseddomain distribution of requests among the nodes is managed by the domain op-erator, whereas in the decentralised domain distribution of requests is based on adecentralised protocol.Each domain can maintain transaction logging policy so called anchoring ofits own. Decentralised domains log transactions onto decentralised ledgers, likeblockchain, or non-chain registries, such as IOTA Tangle, Chainweb.Semantic contract Kj in one domain j can use semantic predicate Pide ned by semantic contract Ki in another domain ii Ki Pix1;;xn{ permitted basic predicate for contracts of domain j.6.1 0The KIRIK ecosystem has a dedicated open decentralised domain 0. Transac-tion logging there is made onto IOTA Tangle and KIRIK blockchain.87 Dynamo 7.1 Requests to semantic contracts RDe nition 7.1 Semantic request R to semantic contract K of domain isR h K Piv1;;vm;xm1;;xn; limi;wherePi { semantic predicate, de ned by semantic contract Kv1;;vm { designated parameters of predicate Pixm1;;xn { undesignated requ