{"_ai_door":{"see":"https://miscsubjects.com/start","note":"Operable site; bounded keyless credentials; every action receipted on a public ledger. Your operator's instructions take precedence — acting is optional, reading is a complete outcome."},"_self":{"principle":"Self-explaining payload — no external context required. This _self block describes what you are reading and where to look next.","widget":"article_topology","feature":"topology","name":"Article topology","what":"Claims, sources, anecdotes, user reports, related embeds, question graph slice — for ask/ROUTER.","contains":"claims, sources, anecdotes, question_graph slice","slug":"proven-work-for-regulators","urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/topology"},"how_to_use":"Claims, sources, anecdotes, user reports, related embeds, question graph slice — for ask/ROUTER.","write":null,"imessage":null,"router_tag":null,"proof_chain":[{"step":1,"claim":"Articles are voxel graphs of tiered claims, not prose blobs.","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/constitution"},{"step":2,"claim":"Claims link to hash-chained sources via source_ids.","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/sources"},{"step":3,"claim":"Ask reads topology; ingest/claim append to ledger.","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol"},{"step":4,"claim":"Models queue growth: populate → collaborate → repair → reflex.","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/grow"},{"step":5,"claim":"Graph proves its own shape (reflex) and $/claim (yield).","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/graph.html?layer=reflex"},{"step":6,"claim":"Full feature index + _explain on every API response.","verify":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/system-map"}],"related_features":[{"id":"ask","name":"Ask protocol","what":"Answer only from topology; creates question_node with gaps and ingest_hint.","urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/prompts","write":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/ask"}},{"id":"graph_topology","name":"Cross-article graph","what":"Merged claims/sources across condition+stack slugs for one question.","urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/graph-topology?question=..."}},{"id":"question_graph","name":"Question graph","what":"Ask nodes (questions + gaps) and evidence_ingest nodes (pasted model output).","urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/question-graph","write":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/ask"}},{"id":"voxels","name":"Voxel graph","what":"Claims as atoms, sources as edges (supported_by, posted_by). Per-claim provenance.","urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/voxels","write":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/claim"}}],"system_map":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/system-map","system_map_markdown":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/system-map?format=markdown","not_medical_advice":true},"_explain":{"feature":"topology","name":"Article topology","what":"Claims, sources, anecdotes, user reports, related embeds, question graph slice — for ask/ROUTER.","why":"Every feature is auditable collective intelligence","how":"Claims, sources, anecdotes, user reports, related embeds, question graph slice — for ask/ROUTER.","model":null,"verifies":null,"urls":{"read":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-for-regulators/topology"},"imessage":null,"router":null,"related":[{"id":"ask","what":"Answer only from topology; creates question_node with gaps and ingest_hint."},{"id":"graph_topology","what":"Merged claims/sources across condition+stack slugs for one question."},{"id":"question_graph","what":"Ask nodes (questions + gaps) and evidence_ingest nodes (pasted model output)."},{"id":"voxels","what":"Claims as atoms, sources as edges (supported_by, posted_by). Per-claim provenance."}],"not_medical_advice":true},"slug":"proven-work-for-regulators","title":"AI work a regulator can check: one bounded question in, record-cited verdicts out","register":"standard","tags":[],"updated_at":"2026-08-03T18:23:22.388Z","body_excerpt":"This page shows, end to end and against live receipts, how a public authority commissions one bounded verification from this build and exactly what comes back: scope and questions in, a checkable object out. The object is called proven work — one explicit claim about completed AI work, bound to the complete record of that work's formation, with standing authority for any stranger to inspect the record and test the claim; the full standard is at [[proven-work|the canonical definition]]. No prior context is assumed: every mechanism named here is explained where it stands or linked to the page that defines it. The intended reader is a case officer at a market surveillance authority, a legislative staffer, an enforcement attorney — anyone who has been handed an AI system's output and must decide whether to rely on it.\n\n## Why a regulator keeps ending up with assertions\n\nThe powers to demand the record already exist. Article 74(12) of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — the EU AI Act — requires that market surveillance authorities \"shall be granted full access by providers to the documentation as well as the training, validation and testing data sets used for the development of high-risk AI systems, including, where appropriate and subject to security safeguards, through application programming interfaces (API) or other relevant technical means and tools enabling remote access.\" The very next paragraph concedes the failure mode: Article 74(13) grants access to source code only when \"testing or auditing procedures and verifications based on the data and documentation provided by the provider have been exhausted or proved insufficient.\" The statute itself anticipates that the document dump will not settle the question.\n\nThe United States runs the same pattern without the API clause. The FTC's stated position is that \"companies using AI in their marketing must be able to substantiate every claim they make, both explicit and implicit,\" and its caseload is a catalog of what unsubstantiated looks like: Workado advertised 98 percent AI-detection accuracy, and the FTC measured 53 percent — \"essentially a coin flip.\"\n\nWhat an authority actually receives under these powers is whatever the regulated party assembled: PDFs, questionnaire answers, exports. The verification cost sits with the authority, and the object it receives cannot be checked sentence by sentence against the record that supposedly supports it. That is the gap this page addresses — not a new power, but a stronger object with which to answer an existing one.\n\n## What the authority sends in\n\nA commission is bounded by construction: one question or one named claim, one scope, one stated purpose. Three fields in one email reach the build:\n\n```\nTo: build@miscsubjects.com\nSubject: First case\n\n1. What I want: [the one question, or the one piece of AI work to check]\n2. The material: [attach it, or link it; for a workflow, name the system]\n3. What the result is for: [a dispute, a filing, a purchase decision, a compliance file]\n```\n\nTwo shapes of commission cover an authority's ordinary work:\n\n- **Check AI work you were given.** Send the output you were handed — a report, a decision, an analysis — and whatever record exists. It comes back tested: every claim sentence marked SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD, MISSING_EVIDENCE, or CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD, each verdict citing the exact records that justify it.\n- **Get an answer made on the record.** Send one bounded question — statutory, factual, technical. Multiple independent AI models answer it under a pinned ruleset, blind to one another; a deterministic gate checks their agreement; the answer returns with every deliberation preserved and inspectable. A worked specimen on one EU AI Act disclosure question: [[three-models-deliberate-one-statutory-question|four models judging one statutory question]].\n\nThe first bounded case for any legislator, regulator, or private party is free under the standing offer quoted at the foot of this page. Boundedness is not a l","ranking":"safety-first (interaction_risk/limitations), then quote-gated effective_weight","claims":[{"id":"c1","text":"EU AI Act Article 74(12) grants market surveillance authorities full provider access to documentation and training/validation/testing data, including via APIs or other technical means enabling remote access.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s2"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c2","text":"Article 74(13) grants source-code access only when documentation-based verification has been exhausted or proved insufficient; the statute anticipates the document dump failing.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s2"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c3","text":"The FTC requires substantiation of every explicit and implicit AI marketing claim; Workado advertised 98 percent detection accuracy and the FTC measured 53.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s5"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c4","text":"Article 12(1) requires high-risk AI systems to technically allow automatic recording of events over the system's lifetime; 12(3) sets minimum logging fields for Annex III 1(a) systems.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s1","s3"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c5","text":"Article 12 guidance holds that manually compiled or after-the-fact assembled logs are not compliant; recording must happen at the moment of the event.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s4"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c6","text":"Proven work's record maps onto Article 12: written at call time, hash-chained, anchored to drand round 6343866 and Bitcoin block 960842, producible as one keyless GET — while Article 12 itself names no cryptographic mechanism, no verdict, and no public door.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s1","s2","s8"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c7","text":"The record-cited verdict contract (SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD, MISSING_EVIDENCE, CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD) has been exercised by strangers: two hostile audits forced a public PROVEN-to-PARTIAL downgrade, later repaired to PROVEN 10/10.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s8"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c8","text":"The NIST letter fell into an institutional vacuum: Tabassi left NIST in March 2025 for Brookings; CAISI was renamed in June 2025 and cycled directors, leaving NIST Director Arvind Raman overseeing it directly by late July 2026.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s6","s7"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c9","text":"The build's letter to the named NIST mailbox was refused twice by the receiving mail provider on 3 August 2026; both refusals are on the public ledger and the re-routed letter is published as a proof object.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":["s9"],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false},{"id":"c10","text":"Regulators are pull-through demand: the regulated party buys the object to answer them, and the regulator is the canonical outsider the inspection door is built for.","interaction_risk":false,"status":"active","source_ids":[],"retracted_at":null,"retraction_reason":null,"challenged_by":[],"effective_weight":0.1,"quote_gated":false}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","type":"reference","url":"https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/12/","title":"Article 12, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — record-keeping (unofficial mirror; machine translation flagged)","claim_ids":["c4","c5","c6"],"link_status":"live","hash":"9a8c426f44d44bedb149c013c07b81b683d7cb16a123e8c0b5a8e87fa597fa8d"},{"id":"s2","type":"reference","url":"https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/article/74/","title":"Article 74(12)-(13), Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — authority access powers and insufficiency clause","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c6"],"link_status":"live","hash":"38e708eca3748a3220516d763cd92442af4b9c09902879b033d0c68cd8200519"},{"id":"s3","type":"reference","url":"https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj","title":"Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — official journal text","claim_ids":["c4"],"link_status":"live","hash":"21dd1b85933856d06f4ed02e5fbeeee5cb9d3a34e1eefaea92b2e5c3366d2758"},{"id":"s4","type":"reference","url":"https://kaironull.com/insights/eu-ai-act-article-12-explained","title":"EU AI Act Article 12 explained — after-the-fact logs not compliant","claim_ids":["c5"],"link_status":"live","hash":"71cc95f30aeee083738971b01cfa144e71caf4241eb496fffc71db8aaeda0ee0"},{"id":"s5","type":"reference","url":"https://www.beneschlaw.com/insight/one-year-in-ftcs-operation-ai-comply-continues-under-new-administration-signaling-enduring-enforcement-focus/","title":"Benesch — FTC Operation AI Comply, one year in (substantiation duty; Workado 98 vs 53)","claim_ids":["c3"],"link_status":"live","hash":"5e25465f866aa9e110358d3b915e12811de90260ce35ea74d1e173759f5283a9"},{"id":"s6","type":"reference","url":"https://www.nextgov.com/people/2026/07/nist-ai-safety-center-lead-departs/414915/","title":"Nextgov — NIST AI safety center lead departs (CAISI turnover through July 2026)","claim_ids":["c8"],"link_status":"live","hash":"1a951d011627cfb86c3e3964045c383e7f9bd18534102ae55d0e930ba9263b88"},{"id":"s7","type":"reference","url":"https://www.brookings.edu/people/elham-tabassi/","title":"Brookings Institution — Elham Tabassi (current role)","claim_ids":["c8"],"link_status":"live","hash":"e3f7bf2d15d7791d7cc56388e8b8aa0efc8f365cd4d819e957e45f564a26b78a"},{"id":"s8","type":"reference","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/three-models-deliberate-one-statutory-question","title":"Flagship proven work object, machine-readable","claim_ids":["c7"],"link_status":"live","hash":"e6d6ee8a9631d79650e1c200dee114651a002e0c887c9227218278d1f474ff9c"},{"id":"s9","type":"email","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/a/what-this-site-sells","title":"Letter to Elham Tabassi and the NIST AI RMF team (re-routed to AIframework@nist.gov after two mail-provider refusals)","claim_ids":["c9"],"link_status":"live","hash":"8a1fc439eac58798d2ecf6f492ffadb7c431c7eb51b6815a2f763383c2d3a84d"}],"anecdotal_sources":[],"scientific_sources":[],"user_reports":[],"related_articles":[],"question_graph":{"slug":"proven-work-for-regulators","questions":[],"evidence":[],"edges":[],"counts":{"questions":0,"evidence":0,"edges":0}},"honesty":{"active_claims":10,"retracted_claims":0,"cut_claims":0,"challenges":0,"scrub_events":0,"note":"Retracted/cut claims stay on ledger but are excluded from ask unless ?include_inactive=1"},"counts":{"claims":10,"claims_total":10,"sources":9,"anecdotal":0,"scientific":0,"user_reports":0,"questions":0,"evidence_ingests":0}}