Governance artifacts
Governance files brought into scope by this page
This page is anchored to published surfaces that declare identity, precedence, limits, and the corpus reading conditions. Their order below gives the recommended reading sequence.
interpretive-weighting-policy.json
/interpretive-weighting-policy.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
- Governs
- Part of the corpus reading conditions.
- Bounds
- An inference zone that would otherwise remain implicit.
Does not guarantee: This file does not, on its own, guarantee system obedience.
authority-scope-matrix.json
/authority-scope-matrix.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
- Governs
- Part of the corpus reading conditions.
- Bounds
- An inference zone that would otherwise remain implicit.
Does not guarantee: This file does not, on its own, guarantee system obedience.
claim-authority-classes.json
/claim-authority-classes.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
- Governs
- Part of the corpus reading conditions.
- Bounds
- An inference zone that would otherwise remain implicit.
Does not guarantee: This file does not, on its own, guarantee system obedience.
Complementary artifacts (6)
These surfaces extend the main block. They add context, discovery, routing, or observation depending on the topic.
source-weighting-policy.json
/source-weighting-policy.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
official-vs-external-source-conflicts.json
/official-vs-external-source-conflicts.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
weighting-abuse-boundaries.json
/weighting-abuse-boundaries.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
attested-interpretive-units.json
/attested-interpretive-units.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
interpretive-integrity.json
/interpretive-integrity.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
content-digests.json
/content-digests.json
Published machine-first governance surface.
Evidence layer
Probative surfaces brought into scope by this page
This page does more than point to governance files. It is also anchored to surfaces that make observation, traceability, fidelity, and audit more reconstructible. Their order below makes the minimal evidence chain explicit.
- 01Canon and scopeDefinitions canon
- 02Evidence artifactclaims.json
- 03Evidence artifactauthority-precedence.json
- 04Evidence artifacteac-resolution-matrix.json
Definitions canon
/canon.md
Opposable base for identity, scope, roles, and negations that must survive synthesis.
- Makes provable
- The reference corpus against which fidelity can be evaluated.
- Does not prove
- Neither that a system already consults it nor that an observed response stays faithful to it.
- Use when
- Before any observation, test, audit, or correction.
claims.json
/claims.json
Published surface that contributes to making an evidence chain more reconstructible.
- Makes provable
- Part of the observation, trace, audit, or fidelity chain.
- Does not prove
- Neither total proof, obedience guarantee, nor implicit certification.
- Use when
- When a page needs to make its evidence regime explicit.
authority-precedence.json
/authority-precedence.json
Published surface that contributes to making an evidence chain more reconstructible.
- Makes provable
- Part of the observation, trace, audit, or fidelity chain.
- Does not prove
- Neither total proof, obedience guarantee, nor implicit certification.
- Use when
- When a page needs to make its evidence regime explicit.
eac-resolution-matrix.json
/eac-resolution-matrix.json
Published surface that contributes to making an evidence chain more reconstructible.
- Makes provable
- Part of the observation, trace, audit, or fidelity chain.
- Does not prove
- Neither total proof, obedience guarantee, nor implicit certification.
- Use when
- When a page needs to make its evidence regime explicit.
CAI: Attested Integrity Layer
The Attested Integrity Layer does not weight sources. It verifies that a selected canonical unit matches a published, canonicalized and identifiable version of the corpus.
Its scope is deliberately narrow: a SHA-256 digest attests the integrity of a unit after canonicalization. It does not prove the general truth of the claim, the fidelity of a summary, external acceptance, or behavioral compliance by a third-party model.
CAI therefore addresses this question: when an AI system, agent, auditor or retrieval system claims to have used a canonical unit, can the unit be identified, versioned, scoped and checked against a published digest and declared transformation boundaries?
The layer publishes attested interpretive units, canonicalization rules, content digests and usage limits. Its purpose is to prevent silent falsification of the official corpus, not to suppress external contradiction.
The CPI: Interpretive Weighting Layer intervenes afterwards, when the system must decide how much weight an official unit, proof artifact, external source or criticism should receive according to claim class. CAI attests integrity. CPI assigns interpretive weight. The two layers must remain separate.
Proposed normative rule
An attested unit can prove that a canonicalized form matches a published digest. It cannot prove that the unit is true beyond its authority scope, that a summary is faithful, that external criticism is invalid, or that an official source must prevail over every other source.
What CAI permits
- citing or referencing a canonical unit with its identifier, source, version and digest;
- checking that a unit was not altered at the level of its canonicalized representation;
- separating an intact official source, external commentary, evidence and paraphrase;
- auditing whether an answer claims to rely on an obsolete, missing or altered unit.
What CAI forbids
- presenting a hash as proof of truth;
- using a digest to invalidate qualified external criticism;
- conflating cryptographic integrity with interpretive fidelity;
- hashing poor scalar values, such as
true, without an enriched canonical interpretive unit.