|
| 1 | +# Partner Review Brief |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +Project: DigiEmu VSC / VSC Core |
| 4 | +Release context: v2.28 |
| 5 | +Status: partner-facing review brief / PDF source |
| 6 | + |
| 7 | +## Purpose |
| 8 | + |
| 9 | +This brief gives partners and reviewers a compact entry point into VSC Core 2.x. |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +It is designed to be short enough for email sharing or PDF export. |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +It is not a certification. |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +It does not start v3.0. |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +## One-sentence summary |
| 18 | + |
| 19 | +```text |
| 20 | +VSC turns AI decision states into portable, verifiable evidence. |
| 21 | +``` |
| 22 | + |
| 23 | +## Current status |
| 24 | + |
| 25 | +VSC Core 2.x is review-ready. |
| 26 | + |
| 27 | +It includes: |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +- a Go verifier |
| 30 | +- Node / Go comparison flow |
| 31 | +- machine-readable JSON verification results |
| 32 | +- conformance fixture comparison |
| 33 | +- CI conformance workflow |
| 34 | +- CI artifact upload |
| 35 | +- human-readable proof-boundary documentation |
| 36 | +- partner / reviewer interop documentation |
| 37 | +- enterprise review package |
| 38 | +- critical code-path comments |
| 39 | + |
| 40 | +The correct status is: |
| 41 | + |
| 42 | +```text |
| 43 | +Review-ready, not certified. |
| 44 | +``` |
| 45 | + |
| 46 | +## Core proof boundary |
| 47 | + |
| 48 | +```text |
| 49 | +VSC proves state integrity, not truth. |
| 50 | +``` |
| 51 | + |
| 52 | +VSC can help verify whether a VSC evidence bundle is internally consistent and reconstructable. |
| 53 | + |
| 54 | +VSC does not prove that an AI decision was true, fair, legal, compliant, morally correct, or externally attributable. |
| 55 | + |
| 56 | +## Result interpretation |
| 57 | + |
| 58 | +```text |
| 59 | +PASS = VSC state evidence is internally consistent. |
| 60 | +FAIL = VSC integrity or verification mismatch detected. |
| 61 | +ERROR = Verification could not complete. |
| 62 | +``` |
| 63 | + |
| 64 | +Important: |
| 65 | + |
| 66 | +```text |
| 67 | +PASS does not mean truth. |
| 68 | +FAIL does not mean wrongdoing. |
| 69 | +ERROR is distinct from FAIL. |
| 70 | +``` |
| 71 | + |
| 72 | +## Reproducibility commands |
| 73 | + |
| 74 | +Reviewers can run: |
| 75 | + |
| 76 | +```powershell |
| 77 | +npm run vsc -- compare:fixtures |
| 78 | +``` |
| 79 | + |
| 80 | +Expected: |
| 81 | + |
| 82 | +```text |
| 83 | +Final result: COMPARE_PASS |
| 84 | +``` |
| 85 | + |
| 86 | +Reviewers can also run: |
| 87 | + |
| 88 | +```powershell |
| 89 | +npm run vsc -- compare:fixtures --json |
| 90 | +``` |
| 91 | + |
| 92 | +Expected JSON field: |
| 93 | + |
| 94 | +```json |
| 95 | +{ |
| 96 | + "result": "COMPARE_PASS" |
| 97 | +} |
| 98 | +``` |
| 99 | + |
| 100 | +Full verification: |
| 101 | + |
| 102 | +```powershell |
| 103 | +npm run vsc -- verify-all |
| 104 | +``` |
| 105 | + |
| 106 | +Expected high-level summary: |
| 107 | + |
| 108 | +```text |
| 109 | +FAIL: 0 |
| 110 | +``` |
| 111 | + |
| 112 | +## What COMPARE_PASS means |
| 113 | + |
| 114 | +```text |
| 115 | +COMPARE_PASS means the comparison runner and verifier agree on expected fixture result classes. |
| 116 | +``` |
| 117 | + |
| 118 | +It does not mean: |
| 119 | + |
| 120 | +- real-world truth |
| 121 | +- legal correctness |
| 122 | +- fairness |
| 123 | +- compliance |
| 124 | +- external artifact validity |
| 125 | + |
| 126 | +## Interop model |
| 127 | + |
| 128 | +VSC can reference external artifacts while keeping proof domains separate. |
| 129 | + |
| 130 | +Safe interpretation: |
| 131 | + |
| 132 | +```text |
| 133 | +TBN = identity / trust verification |
| 134 | +VSC = decision-state verification |
| 135 | +CLARIXO = responsibility / attribution context |
| 136 | +``` |
| 137 | + |
| 138 | +Core interop rule: |
| 139 | + |
| 140 | +```text |
| 141 | +VSC can point outward without taking over external proof domains. |
| 142 | +``` |
| 143 | + |
| 144 | +Related boundary: |
| 145 | + |
| 146 | +```text |
| 147 | +External references are pointers, not proof imports. |
| 148 | +``` |
| 149 | + |
| 150 | +## What an external reference means |
| 151 | + |
| 152 | +An external reference means: |
| 153 | + |
| 154 | +```text |
| 155 | +VSC points to an external artifact as context. |
| 156 | +``` |
| 157 | + |
| 158 | +Examples: |
| 159 | + |
| 160 | +- TBN receipt reference |
| 161 | +- CLARIXO record reference |
| 162 | +- external audit note reference |
| 163 | +- partner evidence record reference |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | +## What an external reference does not mean |
| 166 | + |
| 167 | +An external reference does not mean: |
| 168 | + |
| 169 | +- VSC verified the external artifact |
| 170 | +- VSC imported the external proof claim |
| 171 | +- VSC proved identity |
| 172 | +- VSC proved attribution |
| 173 | +- VSC proved legal responsibility |
| 174 | +- VSC proved compliance |
| 175 | +- VSC proved truth |
| 176 | +- VSC completed production integration with the external system |
| 177 | + |
| 178 | +## Suggested partner review path |
| 179 | + |
| 180 | +Suggested first review path: |
| 181 | + |
| 182 | +1. Read this brief. |
| 183 | +2. Read the enterprise review package. |
| 184 | +3. Run the reproducibility commands. |
| 185 | +4. Inspect the technical verification path. |
| 186 | +5. Inspect the interop boundary documents. |
| 187 | +6. Confirm whether the proof boundaries are clear enough for your use case. |
| 188 | +7. Identify whether your system should reference VSC, be referenced by VSC, or require a separate verifier. |
| 189 | + |
| 190 | +## Key documents |
| 191 | + |
| 192 | +Main review package: |
| 193 | + |
| 194 | +```text |
| 195 | +docs/review/ENTERPRISE_REVIEW_PACKAGE.md |
| 196 | +``` |
| 197 | + |
| 198 | +Partner / reviewer interop brief: |
| 199 | + |
| 200 | +```text |
| 201 | +docs/interop/PARTNER_REVIEWER_INTEROP_BRIEF.md |
| 202 | +``` |
| 203 | + |
| 204 | +Interop consolidation summary: |
| 205 | + |
| 206 | +```text |
| 207 | +docs/interop/INTEROP_CONSOLIDATION_SUMMARY.md |
| 208 | +``` |
| 209 | + |
| 210 | +PASS / FAIL explanation: |
| 211 | + |
| 212 | +```text |
| 213 | +docs/non-technical/PASS_FAIL_EXPLAINED.md |
| 214 | +``` |
| 215 | + |
| 216 | +Executive one-pager: |
| 217 | + |
| 218 | +```text |
| 219 | +docs/non-technical/EXECUTIVE_ONE_PAGER.md |
| 220 | +``` |
| 221 | + |
| 222 | +## Suggested partner questions |
| 223 | + |
| 224 | +Partners may answer: |
| 225 | + |
| 226 | +- What artifact does your system produce? |
| 227 | +- What proof claim does your system make? |
| 228 | +- Should VSC reference your artifact only? |
| 229 | +- Should your artifact require a separate verifier? |
| 230 | +- What identifier, hash, or URI should VSC record? |
| 231 | +- Which proof boundary must remain outside VSC? |
| 232 | +- What wording would avoid overclaiming? |
| 233 | + |
| 234 | +## Explicit non-claims |
| 235 | + |
| 236 | +VSC does not claim: |
| 237 | + |
| 238 | +- formal certification |
| 239 | +- production enterprise certification |
| 240 | +- legal compliance |
| 241 | +- legal responsibility proof |
| 242 | +- truth proof |
| 243 | +- identity proof |
| 244 | +- attribution proof |
| 245 | +- fairness proof |
| 246 | +- external artifact validation |
| 247 | +- completed TBN / VSC / CLARIXO integration |
| 248 | +- v3.0 start |
| 249 | + |
| 250 | +## Suggested next step |
| 251 | + |
| 252 | +A useful next step is an external review session using: |
| 253 | + |
| 254 | +```text |
| 255 | +docs/review/ENTERPRISE_REVIEW_PACKAGE.md |
| 256 | +``` |
| 257 | + |
| 258 | +The review should focus on reproducibility, boundary clarity, CI behavior, result interpretation, and partner handoff assumptions. |
| 259 | + |
| 260 | +## Summary |
| 261 | + |
| 262 | +VSC Core 2.x is positioned as: |
| 263 | + |
| 264 | +```text |
| 265 | +Review-ready, not certified. |
| 266 | +``` |
| 267 | + |
| 268 | +The central rule remains: |
| 269 | + |
| 270 | +```text |
| 271 | +VSC proves state integrity, not truth. |
| 272 | +``` |
0 commit comments