Scope-bound evidence records

Separate proof families. Separate claims.

Mechanism evidence, empirical evaluation evidence and operating evidence are presented as distinct records so each claim is tied to the proof that directly supports it. Institution-specific effectiveness remains a separate customer evidence track.

RUN-SCE-001 · Mechanism evidence

What the constructed scenario demonstrated.

Observable behaviour inside the declared synthetic scope.

30constructed synthetic events
12observable routing differences
6declared interaction activations
3/3authority requests denied
MEANING

Mechanism evidence describes what the frozen demonstrator did in its declared synthetic scope.

NOT MEANING

Fraud truth, accuracy, predictive uplift, production performance or institutional validation.

RUN-SCE-001 · Reproducibility & evidence controls

Checks applied to the frozen evidence package.

Exact source labels are preserved without marketing paraphrase.

66/66source manifest
95/95Python checks
95/95Node.js checks
15/15expected-release gateFrozen demonstrator artifact check; not a production-release readiness gate.
6/6destructive tamper controls passed
MEANING

Engineering checks describe reproducibility and evidence-control behaviour in the frozen package.

NOT MEANING

Full Core conformance, production readiness, security certification or regulatory approval.

Supporting empirical evidence — BAF-003

Supporting evidence under fixed review capacity.

AEGI BAF Context Representation Ablation Benchmark v0.1

A frozen comparison. A positive indication. An exact reproduction.

Using public synthetic BAF Variant V, AEGI ran a frozen, fixed-capacity comparison under the same learning procedure between an application-local control and a benchmark-specific context-enriched treatment. At the same Top-1% review capacity, the treatment surfaced 544 versus 494 fraud-labelled cases across 2,417 review slots—50 additional cases, or +20.7 per 1,000 reviews (95% bootstrap CI: +9.1 to +32.3). The result reproduced exactly.

EVALUATION DESIGN

Same learning procedure.
Same review capacity.
Different risk representation.

The comparison isolates representation under a common frozen learning procedure and fixed Top-1% review capacity.

DATA ACCESS BOUNDARY

Source schema was inspected, while evaluation outcomes remained unseen before frozen execution. This was not an untouched blind holdout or an independently administered evaluation.

Primary finding POSITIVE_INDICATION Frozen benchmark classification
Fixed-capacity queue result 544 vs 494 +50 fraud-labelled cases
Normalised effect +20.7 / 1,000 95% bootstrap CI: +9.1 to +32.3
Exact reproduction PASS Primary and reproduction result hashes matched
EVENT / PRIMARY RUNEVT-BAF-003 · RUN-BAF-003
REPRODUCTION RUNRUN-BAF-003_REPRO · PASSExact stable-result identity
PUBLIC RELEASE CLASSIFICATIONSupporting empirical evidence
WHAT THIS ESTABLISHES
  • Frozen evaluation specifications and classification rule
  • The same learning procedure and fixed review capacity
  • A positive indication for the benchmark-specific context-enriched representation
  • Exact declared reproduction
  • Supporting empirical evidence within the public-synthetic scope
WHAT THIS DOES NOT ESTABLISH
  • A 20.7% fraud reduction or model-accuracy improvement
  • Universal Shield or model superiority
  • Production performance in customer environments, fraud-loss reduction or production readiness
  • An untouched blind holdout
  • Independent validation or independently administered evaluation
  • Bank or GXS validation
  • Feedzai endorsement
STATUS AND NEXT QUESTION

RUN-BAF-003 is complete and frozen.

No further model execution is required for this run. It supports the value of risk representation under fixed review capacity in this public-synthetic setting. Institution-specific value remains a question for institution-defined historical replay or non-customer-impacting shadow evaluation.

Explore the Controlled Evaluation

Operating evidence — Operations v0.4.0

Deployed evaluation operations.

AEGI Operations is deployed for AEGI operating use and supports a structured, traceable case workflow for bounded evaluations—from intake and readiness through ownership, next actions, saved drafts, interaction history and handoff. The accepted release identity remains separate from the current operating state.

RELEASE STATEACCEPTED_INTERNAL_OPERATIONS_BASELINEAccepted internal operations baseline · candidate v0.4.0-rc2
RELEASE TEST SUITE56 passed13.12s in the accepted release record
STATIC / RUNTIME CHECKSPASSRuff · Django check · no migration drift
INTERACTIVE WORKFLOWPASS_USER_REPORTEDBrowser walkthrough and refresh persistence reported internally
Synthetic AEGI Operations workspace showing an evaluation case, owner, handling status, next step, follow-up due date and handling history.
AEGI-operated evaluation workspace — synthetic case shownOwnership, next actions, saved drafts and manually recorded handoffs are maintained through the case workflow.Synthetic data shown for public demonstration. Customer environments require separate approval and deployment evidence.
Technical release boundary

Current operating state: AEGI Operations is deployed for AEGI's own operating use. The accepted v0.4.0 release record does not, by itself, establish customer-host deployment. Institution-specific identity and access controls, external messaging, ingress/hosting configuration and production integration are accepted separately for each environment.

Evidence maturity separation

Progress in one track does not advance every track.

Public evidence, product maturity and customer validation remain separate.

DEMONSTRATED / TESTED

Bounded public evidence.

  • RUN-SCE-001 mechanism and evidence controls in its frozen synthetic scope
  • RUN-BAF-003 supporting empirical evidence in its frozen public-synthetic scope
  • Shared Risk Context and Mode Guard behaviours only where directly supported
  • AEGI Operations v0.4.0 accepted internal release baseline, with current operating state deployed for AEGI use; public demonstration uses synthetic cases
DESIGNED / EVALUATION-CANDIDATE

Controlled evaluation methods.

  • Controlled replay subject to approved workflow and evidence readiness
  • Governed candidate evaluation within bounded scope
  • Execution posture defined for the selected evaluation profile
INSTITUTION-SPECIFIC EVIDENCE

Customer-environment evidence.

  • Customer-defined historical replay and comparison
  • Customer security, privacy and residual-risk review
  • Decision on any later shadow or production stage

Progress in the Evidence track does not automatically advance Product Maturity or Customer Validation.

CORE ASSURANCE CONCEPT

A broader evidence-assurance discipline.

Core is described by architectural consequence and review value.

FROZEN DEMONSTRATOR EVIDENCE

Selected mechanisms and controls.

RUN-SCE-001 does not establish full Core conformance or production readiness.

NEXT EVIDENCE STEP

Move from public evidence to an institution-defined question.

A Controlled Evaluation applies the relevant workflow, baseline, approved inputs and decision measures in the customer context.

Explore Controlled Evaluation