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
- 02Response authorizationQ-Layer: response legitimacy
- 03Evidence artifactinterpretation-policy.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.
Q-Layer: response legitimacy
/response-legitimacy.md
Surface that explains when to answer, when to suspend, and when to switch to legitimate non-response.
- Makes provable
- The legitimacy regime to apply before treating an output as receivable.
- Does not prove
- Neither that a given response actually followed this regime nor that an agent applied it at runtime.
- Use when
- When a page deals with authority, non-response, execution, or restraint.
interpretation-policy.json
/.well-known/interpretation-policy.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.
Defined authority vs inferred authority
This clarification separates authority that is explicitly declared from authority that an AI system reconstructs from weak signals.
The distinction is decisive because an AI answer may be coherent and sourced while the authority that governs it has been guessed rather than declared.
Defined authority
Defined authority exists when the system can identify, before synthesis, which source or layer governs the meaning of a claim.
It may be declared through canonical definitions, doctrine pages, entity graphs, governance files, source hierarchies, or explicit response-legitimacy rules.
Defined authority lowers the amount of interpretive work the model must perform. It does not force obedience. It makes the governing surface visible enough to be preserved, audited, cited, or used as a reason for non-response.
Inferred authority
Inferred authority exists when the system reconstructs authority from indirect signals:
- domain reputation;
- citation frequency;
- recency;
- ranking;
- wording confidence;
- third-party repetition;
- semantic proximity;
- apparent expertise.
These signals can be useful for retrieval. They become dangerous when they silently replace declared authority.
The GovLoop trigger
The GovLoop article on government information makes the issue concrete: public information may be published and accurate, but AI systems can still misread who issued it, when it applies, how current it is, or which authority it belongs to after extraction.
That insight fits the site’s doctrine if it is generalized: authority should not be inferred when it can be defined.
Operational rule
When a system must choose between defined authority and inferred authority, defined authority governs unless it is outdated, contradicted by a higher declared source, or explicitly marked as non-governing.