{
  "version": 1,
  "updated": "2026-09-12",
  "records": [
    {
      "id": "dvs-two-host",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "DVS",
      "claim": "Selected allowed and blocked actions behaved differently on a tested two-computer path.",
      "state": "SUPPORTED WITH BOUNDS",
      "evidence": "A recorded June 6, 2026 test sent one allowed action to a receiving computer and its protected target. The blocked action appeared zero times at both. Both computers were controlled by the founder.",
      "ceiling": "This is an in-house result on the tested path. It does not establish customer deployment, independent reproduction, whole-application coverage, or general production effectiveness.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Recorded in-house test · public source summary",
      "source_note": "Carried forward from the existing public Evidence page; original test date June 6, 2026. The private raw test artifacts are not published here.",
      "title": "Two connected computers",
      "evidence_type": "TESTED",
      "type_note": "Dated in-house execution evidence."
    },
    {
      "id": "dvs-local",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "DVS",
      "claim": "A focused local rerun recorded an allowed request reaching the tool and specified invalid requests producing no tool calls.",
      "state": "SUPPORTED WITH BOUNDS",
      "evidence": "A May 30, 2026 rerun recorded 11 passing tests. The valid request reached the tool once. Changed approval records, missing approval, and reuse attempts produced zero calls to the tool on that tested path.",
      "ceiling": "Eleven tests are a bounded local observation, not a universal success rate or proof against every route or failure mode.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Recorded in-house test · public source summary",
      "source_note": "Carried forward from the existing public Evidence page; original rerun date May 30, 2026. No new rerun is claimed by this page update.",
      "title": "Local approval checks",
      "evidence_type": "TESTED",
      "type_note": "Dated in-house execution evidence."
    },
    {
      "id": "dvs-historical",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "DVS",
      "claim": "A supporting historical report describes one authorized send and six rejected hostile requests.",
      "state": "NEEDS EVIDENCE",
      "evidence": "A later source-based report describes six HTTP 403 responses with the protected target unchanged during those attempts.",
      "ceiling": "The standalone original closeout was not available in the reviewed material. This remains supporting historical reporting; the original result is not independently verified here.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Secondary historical report",
      "source_note": "Retained from the existing public Evidence page. Original closeout date and standalone artifact remain unavailable in this public record.",
      "title": "Supporting historical report",
      "evidence_type": "DECLARED",
      "type_note": "Secondary test report; original record unavailable."
    },
    {
      "id": "orphard-scope",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "ORPHARD",
      "claim": "Orphard frames trajectory and recovery as a control problem distinct from release authority.",
      "state": "OPEN QUESTION",
      "evidence": "The public architecture defines checks on whether continuing work remains inside an evidenced operating envelope, with reconciliation or recovery when it diverges.",
      "ceiling": "Architecture and design scope only. Comparative recovery performance, customer deployment, and independent reproduction are not established by this record.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Public architecture specification",
      "source_note": "Public scope adopted September 12, 2026. The scripted model is not experimental outcome evidence.",
      "title": "Trajectory and recovery",
      "evidence_type": "DECLARED",
      "type_note": "Architecture, role, scope, or source statement."
    },
    {
      "id": "portfoliocontrol-scope",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "PORTFOLIOCONTROL",
      "claim": "PortfolioControl is the live orchestration and control implementation for these control questions.",
      "state": "SUPPORTED WITH BOUNDS",
      "evidence": "The published architecture assigns PortfolioControl the role of examining control behavior in continuing work and returning observed problems to research.",
      "ceiling": "Supports the stated role, not measured control effectiveness. Private operating state and customer validation are not supplied by this record.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Public architecture and role declaration",
      "source_note": "Role declared September 12, 2026. This page contains no public-safe current telemetry feed.",
      "title": "Live orchestration and control",
      "evidence_type": "DECLARED",
      "type_note": "Architecture, role, scope, or source statement."
    },
    {
      "id": "research-scope",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "CRIMSON DELTA",
      "claim": "Crimson Delta connects research questions while programs remain separately governed.",
      "state": "SUPPORTED WITH BOUNDS",
      "evidence": "The public research structure separates program claims and treats constellation links as methodological or problem relationships.",
      "ceiling": "An organizational and methodological statement, not scientific validation or authority transfer between programs.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Public research-governance statement",
      "source_note": "Public scope adopted September 12, 2026. Open R&D does not imply an open-source license for every component.",
      "title": "Separately governed research",
      "evidence_type": "DECLARED",
      "type_note": "Architecture, role, scope, or source statement."
    },
    {
      "id": "joint-delta",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "DVS + ORPHARD",
      "claim": "A bounded joint integration can test whether these controls add value over the strongest competent baseline.",
      "state": "OPEN QUESTION",
      "evidence": "The proposed method compares one workflow against existing controls, measures both useful effects and costs, and preserves negative or inconclusive results.",
      "ceiling": "A proposed comparison, not a completed partner result or demonstrated demand. No incremental operational benefit is claimed before measurement.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Proposed comparative method",
      "source_note": "Public method defined September 12, 2026. No partner outcome is attached to this record.",
      "title": "A bounded joint comparison",
      "evidence_type": "PROPOSED",
      "type_note": "Comparison or integration not yet established."
    },
    {
      "id": "enterprise-continuity",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "DVS + ORPHARD",
      "claim": "Consequential Action Continuity is the proposed contract connecting delegation, state seen, proposal, release, and observed effect.",
      "state": "OPEN QUESTION",
      "evidence": "The proposed enterprise architecture separates a generalized control-plane core, a Latchboard-derived operator interface, DVS release authority, Orphard supervision, and execution through existing enterprise systems.",
      "ceiling": "A synthesis and differentiation hypothesis. A complete enterprise implementation, connector coverage, comparative advantage, purchase demand, and end-to-end effectiveness are not established by this architecture.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Proposed enterprise architecture",
      "source_note": "Founder-directed synthesis supplied September 12, 2026. Component descriptions do not transfer validation to the combined system.",
      "title": "The enterprise continuity contract",
      "evidence_type": "PROPOSED",
      "type_note": "Comparison or integration not yet established."
    },
    {
      "id": "latchboard-scope",
      "version": 1,
      "architecture": "LATCHBOARD",
      "claim": "Latchboard supplies a reference interaction model for bounded human/agent work.",
      "state": "SUPPORTED WITH BOUNDS",
      "evidence": "The existing public demonstration describes AI-proposed task edits, review, stale proposals, ended delegation, and repeated review attempts. The enterprise direction carries those interaction principles into a separate operator console.",
      "ceiling": "The reference workflow does not establish enterprise security, external-action control, or a validated generalized backend. Its proposed console role is distinct from the control-plane core.",
      "updated": "2026-09-12",
      "source_class": "Public demonstration description and proposed interface role",
      "source_note": "Existing public Latchboard description retained; enterprise role added September 12, 2026. No new empirical test is claimed.",
      "title": "The operator interaction model",
      "evidence_type": "DECLARED",
      "type_note": "Architecture, role, scope, or source statement."
    }
  ]
}