# PQC Integration — Reviewer-Ready Pack

**Proposal:** Post-Quantum Cryptography Integration for EU Critical Infrastructure
**Call:** HORIZON-CL3-2025-CS-ECCC-06
**Budget:** €2.8M (€2.0M EU contribution)
**Submission Deadline:** 2025-12-15, 17:00 CET
**Status:** ✅ Reviewer materials complete (2025-11-06)

---

## Overview

This directory contains **EU reviewer-ready materials** for the PQC Integration proposal — the critical components needed for Part B sections (Excellence, Impact, Implementation) and submission to the EU Funding & Tenders Portal.

**Distinction from parent `funding-roadmap/` directory:**
- Parent directory: Strategic coordination (consortium materials, Treasury Nebula, genesis receipts)
- This directory: **Tactical execution** (proposal-specific documents for EU reviewers)

---

## Files in This Directory

### 1. PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd (Mermaid Gantt Chart)
**Purpose:** Visual timeline for Part B Section 3.1 (Work Plan & Resources)
**Content:**
- 5 work packages (WP1-5) across 24 months
- 13 deliverables with dependencies
- 5 major milestones (M0, M6, M12, M18, M24)
- Critical path highlighted (integration points)

**Usage:**
```bash
# Render to PNG for Part B
mmdc -i PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd -o gantt.png -w 2000 -b white
# Include in Part B Section 3.1 as Figure 2
```

---

### 2. PQC_Risk_Register.md (15 Identified Risks)
**Purpose:** Part B Section 3.4 (Other Aspects) and Annex B
**Content:**
- 15 risks across technical, organizational, financial, external categories
- Likelihood × Impact scoring (weighted average: 2.9/9 = MODERATE)
- Specific mitigation strategies mapped to WPs and owners
- €280K contingency budget (10%) with allocation plan
- Monthly review process embedded in consortium governance

**Key risks:**
- R01: NIST PQC standards change (Score: 4)
- R04: Pilot site deployment delays (Score: 4)
- R08: Ψ-Field false positives (Score: 4)

**Reviewer impact:** Shows systematic risk management, not naive optimism

---

### 3. PQC_KPI_Dashboard.md (18 Quantitative KPIs)
**Purpose:** Part B Section 2.1 (Pathways to Impact)
**Content:**
- **Excellence KPIs:** TRL 4→6, 10+ publications, 5+ standards drafts
- **Impact KPIs:** 30% audit cost reduction, 50% faster incident detection, 500+ downloads, 15+ federation nodes
- **Implementation KPIs:** 100% deliverable on-time, ≤10% budget variance, ≥90% steering attendance

**Format:** Table with baseline, target (M24), verification method, measurement frequency

**Reviewer impact:** Demonstrates concrete, measurable outcomes (not vague claims)

---

### 4. PQC_Architecture_EU_Reviewer.mmd (Sanitized Technical Diagram)
**Purpose:** Part B Section 1.3 (Methodology) as Figure 1
**Content:**
- Removed "Rubedo/alchemical" language (kept in parent directory)
- EU-friendly annotations (call topic alignment, policy compliance)
- Shows: Current state (TRL 4) → Hybrid transition (TRL 5) → PQC target (TRL 6)
- VaultMesh core components (LAWCHAIN, Ψ-Field, Federation, Receipts)
- External anchors (TSA, Ethereum, Bitcoin)
- 3 pilot sites (France, Czech, Greece)

**Usage:**
```bash
# Render to PNG for Part B
mmdc -i PQC_Architecture_EU_Reviewer.mmd -o architecture.png -w 2500 -b white
# Include in Part B Section 1.3 as Figure 1
```

---

### 5. PQC_Submission_Checklist.md (Complete Submission Guide)
**Purpose:** Coordinator's step-by-step reference for Dec 11-15 submission sprint
**Content:**
- Pre-submission checklist (Part A, Part B, Annexes, Admin Docs, Consortium Agreement)
- EU portal mandatory fields verification
- File format & size requirements (PDF/A, <10 MB per file)
- Timeline: Dec 11 (freeze) → Dec 12 (upload) → Dec 13 (validation) → Dec 14 (review) → Dec 15 (submit)
- Post-submission actions (debrief, lessons learned, archive)

**Critical sections:**
- Budget sanity check (must sum to exactly 100%)
- Person-month sanity check (4.3 FTE avg over 24 months)
- Deliverable cadence check (13 deliverables over 24 months = ~1 every 2 months)

---

## How These Files Integrate with Part B

### Part B Section 1 — Excellence (30 points)
**1.1 Objectives:**
- Use KPI Dashboard (E1-E3) to define measurable objectives
- "Achieve TRL 6 validation across 3 pilot sites (France, Czech, Greece)"
- "Integrate 3 NIST PQC algorithms (Kyber, Dilithium, SPHINCS+)"
- "Publish 10+ papers in top-tier venues, submit 5+ standards drafts"

**1.2 Relation to Work Programme:**
- Reference Architecture Diagram (Figure 1) showing call topic alignment
- Map WP1-WP5 to call expected outcomes

**1.3 Methodology:**
- Insert Gantt Chart (Figure 2) showing 24-month timeline
- Reference Risk Register: "15 identified risks with mitigation strategies (Annex B)"
- Architecture Diagram shows TRL progression visually

**1.4 Open Science:**
- Reference KPI I3 (Adoption): "Target 500+ open-source downloads post-M24"

---

### Part B Section 2 — Impact (30 points)
**2.1 Pathways to Impact:**
- **Insert full KPI Dashboard table** (18 KPIs)
- Societal: "30% audit cost reduction, 50% faster incident detection"
- Economic: "€100K+ cost savings per organization via cryptographic governance"
- Scientific: "10+ publications, 5+ standards contributions"
- Policy: "NIS2/DORA compliance, EU digital sovereignty"

**2.2 Measures to Maximize Impact:**
- Reference KPI I3 (Adoption): dissemination channels, target audiences
- "Open-source under Apache 2.0, community governance post-project"

**2.3 IPR Management:**
- "All foreground IP under Apache 2.0 (open-source)"
- "Background IP: VaultMesh existing codebase (Apache 2.0)"

---

### Part B Section 3 — Implementation (40 points)
**3.1 Work Plan & Resources:**
- **Insert Gantt Chart** as Figure 2 (PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd)
- Work package table (WP1-5 with lead, person-months, budget)
- Deliverable list (13 deliverables from Gantt)
- Milestone table (5 major milestones: M0, M6, M12, M18, M24)

**3.2 Management Structure:**
- Reference Risk Register: "Monthly risk review in steering committee"
- "Quality assurance: external TRL audit at M12 and M24"

**3.3 Consortium as a Whole:**
- Partner complementarity table (from parent directory `consortium/consortium-tracker.csv`)
- Track record: cite H2020/Horizon Europe projects if partners have them

**3.4 Other Aspects:**
- Reference Risk Register (Annex B): "15 identified risks, weighted average score 2.9/9 (MODERATE)"
- "€280K contingency budget (10%) with allocation plan"
- Ethics: "GDPR compliance for pilot data, no human subjects"

---

## Part B Annexes (Include These Files)

**Annex A: Cryptographic Proof-of-Governance**
- Source: `../PROOF_CHAIN.md`
- Purpose: Demonstrate VaultMesh's unique proof-driven coordination
- Reviewer impact: Differentiates from competitors, shows systematic rigor

**Annex B: Risk Register**
- Source: `PQC_Risk_Register.md`
- Purpose: Detailed risk mitigation strategies
- Reviewer impact: Shows proactive management (positive for Implementation score)

**Annex C: Data Management Plan**
- Source: (to be created) `PQC_Data_Management_Plan.md`
- Purpose: FAIR data principles, open access publications

**Annex D: Partner CVs**
- Source: Collect from partners (2-page EU format)
- Purpose: Demonstrate expertise (2-3 key personnel per partner)

**Annex E: Letters of Commitment**
- Source: (if pilot sites are not full partners) — France, Czech, Greece
- Purpose: Confirm pilot site availability

**Annex F: Gender Equality Plan**
- Source: (if required by call) — reference institutional policies
- Purpose: EU cross-cutting priority

---

## Rendering Diagrams for Part B

### Option 1: Online (Mermaid Live Editor)
```bash
# Copy diagram content
cat PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd | pbcopy  # macOS
# Open https://mermaid.live/
# Paste → Export PNG (2000px width, white background)
```

### Option 2: Command-Line (mermaid-cli)
```bash
# Install once
npm install -g @mermaid-js/mermaid-cli

# Render Gantt chart
mmdc -i PQC_Work_Package_Gantt.mmd -o gantt.png -w 2000 -b white

# Render architecture diagram
mmdc -i PQC_Architecture_EU_Reviewer.mmd -o architecture.png -w 2500 -b white

# Result: High-res PNGs ready for Part B
```

---

## Timeline: Using These Materials (Nov 6 - Dec 15)

### Week 1 (Nov 6-12) — Consortium Alignment
- [x] Reviewer materials created ✅ COMPLETE
- [ ] Share Gantt, Risk Register, KPI Dashboard with partners
- [ ] Conduct consortium kickoff call (discuss WP assignments)

### Week 2-3 (Nov 13-26) — Part B Drafting
- [ ] VaultMesh: Draft Section 1 (Excellence) using Architecture Diagram + KPIs
- [ ] Cyber Trust: Draft Section 2 (Impact) using KPI Dashboard
- [ ] VaultMesh + Univ Brno: Draft Section 3 (Implementation) using Gantt + Risk Register
- [ ] Render diagrams to PNG for inclusion

### Week 4-5 (Nov 27 - Dec 10) — Internal Review
- [ ] Steering committee reviews full Part B draft
- [ ] Partners provide feedback on their sections
- [ ] Integrate changes, finalize budget table
- [ ] Consortium agreement signed (Dec 8)

### Week 6 (Dec 11-15) — Final Submission Sprint
- [ ] Dec 11 (5pm): Proposal freeze (no more edits)
- [ ] Dec 12: Upload to EU portal (Part A + Part B + Annexes)
- [ ] Dec 13: Fix any validation errors
- [ ] Dec 14: Final review by coordinator
- [ ] Dec 15 (before 5pm CET): **SUBMIT**

---

## Quality Assurance

### Internal Peer Review (Week 4-5)
- [ ] Each partner reviews sections they're not lead on
- [ ] External reviewer (optional): former EU evaluator reviews Part B (€1K budget)
- [ ] Spell check (UK English), grammar check
- [ ] References formatted consistently

### EU Portal Validation (Dec 12-13)
- [ ] All mandatory fields filled (green checkmarks)
- [ ] Budget sums to exactly 100%
- [ ] File sizes <10 MB (Part B) and <5 MB (each annex)
- [ ] PDF/A format (archival quality)

### Final Sanity Checks (Dec 14)
- [ ] Budget: VaultMesh 70.4%, Brno 10%, Cyber Trust 12.5%, France 7.1% = 100% ✓
- [ ] Person-months: 104 PM total = 4.3 FTE avg over 24 months ✓
- [ ] Deliverables: 13 total, evenly distributed across 24 months ✓
- [ ] KPIs: 18 quantitative targets with verification methods ✓
- [ ] Risks: 15 identified, 0 high-risk (score ≥6), €280K contingency ✓

---

## Success Criteria

**Reviewer materials are strong if:**
- ✅ Gantt chart shows realistic timeline (not overly aggressive, not too conservative)
- ✅ Risk register identifies genuine risks (not trivial), with concrete mitigations (not vague)
- ✅ KPIs are measurable (not "we will contribute to...") and ambitious but achievable
- ✅ Architecture diagram is clear (reviewers understand in 30 seconds)
- ✅ Submission checklist prevents last-minute errors (all mandatory fields filled)

**Proposal is strong if:**
- 🎯 Excellence: Clear innovation beyond state-of-the-art, TRL 4→6 credible
- 🎯 Impact: Quantified outcomes (30% cost reduction, 10+ publications, 5+ standards)
- 🎯 Implementation: Realistic work plan, experienced consortium, proactive risk management
- 🎯 Differentiation: PROOF_CHAIN.md (Annex A) positions VaultMesh as unique trust anchor

**Estimated evaluation score:** **13-14/15 points** (threshold: 12) → **High funding probability (70-80%)**

---

## Contact & Support

**Coordinator:**
- Karol Stefanski (VaultMesh Guardian)
- Email: guardian@vaultmesh.org
- Role: Part B integration, EU portal submission, consortium coordination

**Section Leads:**
- VaultMesh: Part B Section 1 (Excellence), Section 3 (Implementation)
- Cyber Trust: Part B Section 2 (Impact)
- Univ Brno: Part B Section 3 (Implementation, co-lead with VaultMesh)

**Steering Committee:**
- Weekly check-ins (30 min) — review progress, resolve blockers
- Emergency calls (if critical issues) — within 24h response time

---

## Related Directories

**Parent:** `~/vaultmesh-core/funding-roadmap/` (strategic coordination)
- Treasury Nebula Map (meta-visualization of all 8 proposals)
- Genesis Receipt (Merkle-rooted proof-of-governance)
- Consortium tracker (14 partners across 4 proposals)
- Partner onboarding kit, LOI templates

**Sibling (future):** `digital-twins/`, `genai-health/` (similar reviewer packs for other proposals)

---

## Lessons Learned (Post-Submission)

**What worked well:**
- (To be filled after Dec 15 submission)

**What could improve:**
- (To be filled after Dec 15 submission)

**Apply to Digital Twins (Jan 20 deadline):**
- (To be filled after PQC submission)

---

**Document Control:**
- Version: 1.0-REVIEWER-PACK
- Date: 2025-11-06
- Owner: VaultMesh Technologies B.V. (Coordinator)
- Classification: Consortium Internal (Critical Reference)
- Status: ✅ Complete — Ready for Part B drafting (Week 2-3)