ClaimReceipt, a claim-relative receipt specification and selective verifier that binds typed transaction evidence to a signed experiment manifest and returns PASS, INVALID, or INCONCLUSIVE per claim, is introduced.
Abstract
Agent evaluations face two distinct evidentiary questions: whether a reported claim is recomputable from retained evidence (sufficiency), and whether the retained records cover the committed experiment set (coverage). Generic logs and hash-linked transcripts answer neither reliably. We introduce ClaimReceipt, a claim-relative receipt specification and selective verifier that binds typed transaction evidence to a signed experiment manifest and returns PASS, INVALID, or INCONCLUSIVE per claim. We freeze the specification before implementation (SHA-256 18d109...b81). On 1,392 historical buyer--seller records, a CR-2 verifier reproduces all five manually labeled audit verdicts, exactly replays 600 deterministic and 792 post-generation records, makes every one of 13 declared field groups non-redundant under tested ablations, and returns the expected result on 11/11 semantic faults with 0/8 false positives. We then run a separate prospective CR-3 epoch: 30 assignments are committed before inference, terminal receipts are signed and chained, and private evidence is encrypted for an auditor. Complete evidence yields coverage and accounting PASS; withholding one terminal receipt returns INCONCLUSIVE_COVERAGE, while withholding all private openings preserves coverage and protocol verification but makes economic claims inconclusive, exactly matching a preregistered prediction. Receipt instrumentation adds 0.021% of model-inference time and 9.9 KB per transaction. A specification-legibility probe indicates that our own frozen specification is not yet unambiguous to an independent reader. Claim verification therefore requires both claim-sufficient evidence and a committed universe against which omissions become visible.
This work formalizes evaluator reasoning accountability via three core sources: grounds, norms, and authority, and defines judgment receipts as minimal source replacement sets that reproduce revised verdicts to explain judgment transitions.
A generative search answer can cite a supported passage yet omit a source relationship that changes its interpretation. We specify a claim-gated audit of the query-source-answer tuple. An omission is resolved only when relationship evidence, answer adoption, materiality, and disclosure are all observed; incomplete evid...
Kai-Nan Zhou, Chu-Hong Xu, Gang-Zhen Qian et al.· 0 citations
A pipeline promoting an AI system publishes records claiming the thing evaluated is the thing deployed and that the evidence licensed the transition, and measures whether those records can express that claim and whether it holds where declared.
When developers change one component of an agent, such as its controller, a learned model or its verifier, they usually judge the change by an aggregate task score. That score cannot tell whether improvement was attainable, which component lost value, or what the agent's own checks certify. We introduce a claim-specifi...
The Correlated Promotion Benchmark (CPB), which evaluates whether candidate claims should be admitted to shared memory, shows that policies which deduplicate sources reject many true claims alongside false ones, whereas policies preserving answer coverage admit nearly as many false claims as unrestricted sharing.
Xiao-Yang Li, Yi-Qi Wang, Chen-Cheng Zhu et al.· 1 citation
Persistent AI agents revise beliefs, consolidate memory, and replace execution substrates. Similar successor states can accompany differently authorized transition claims, while legitimate development can change state substantially. We introduce the Cognitive Continuity Test (CCT), a policy-relative contract for verify...