What the filing covers
Cryptographic evidence chains binding mission credentials, sensor data, property-rule versioning, and physical actuation outcomes for autonomous vehicle parking, charging, and delivery operations. I filed this because permission and physical action need to be reviewed together. The recorder binds mission credentials, sensor data, property-rule versions and actuation outcomes into cryptographic evidence chains. Those elements connect authority, observed conditions and what happened. I focus on an account of autonomous parking, charging and delivery operations.
Why it matters now
A property rule can change between visits. A later reviewer needs to know which version applied to the operation being examined. Permission to act is different from evidence of the physical action. Connecting rules, credentials, observations and outcomes makes those questions easier to examine together.
A real-world example
Imagine a question about an autonomous vehicle using a private charging slot. One person asks whether the vehicle had permission. Another asks what physically happened. A third needs to know which property rules applied during the visit.
I bring those questions into one evidence chain. The mission credential addresses the vehicle's authority. The property-rule version identifies the rules associated with the operation. Sensor data contributes observations, and the actuation outcome records the physical result. The record connects these parts of the same visit.
Now imagine the property has changed a rule since that visit. Reviewing only the current rule would mix two different times. Versioning keeps the earlier operation tied to the rules that belong with it. That is why the rule version matters alongside the credential and physical outcome.
Where it applies
This work applies to private-property parking, charging and delivery operations. I focus on the evidence needed after a physical operation, when someone asks how authority and action fit together. The record connects several kinds of information that would otherwise answer separate questions.
For an operator, I would start with the operation under review. What mission was authorized? Which rules applied? What conditions were observed? What physical action followed? Those questions keep the review tied to the event rather than to a general status label.
A cargo-handoff record concentrates on compartment access. Slot control coordinates use of a position. Shared-site traffic coordination addresses several kinds of movement at a facility. This recorder brings authority, conditions and outcomes together for later examination of autonomous operations.
I treat the integrity of that connected account as a practical part of operating a property where software decisions lead to physical actions.
Status
U.S. provisional patent application, filed April 29, 2026; Status: Patent Pending; Sole inventor: Ross D. Blankenship; Assignee: Wins Parking LLC.
Provisional applications establish a priority date; they are not examined.