Current Implementation State and Continuing Work

Public Note

This page intentionally avoids private file paths, local machine details, API keys, signing keys, raw prompts, raw outputs, hidden scoring internals, provider secrets, private model identity, and protected architecture.

[REDACTED — private implementation paths, keys, provider details, and protected internals]

Current Artifact Model

ERT is moving toward a report model with several separate artifacts.

1. Signed Public Report

The signed public report is intended to be the authoritative verification artifact.

It should contain public-safe report fields, provenance information, replay information, diagnostic summaries, public integrity indicators, and signature data.

Once signed, it should not be changed.

2. Client-Readable Diagnostic Report

The client-readable report is intended to translate the signed report into a clearer human-readable format.

It should explain the result using plain-language fields such as:

• Evaluation Status;
• Diagnostic Result;
• Report Integrity;
• ERC Certification;
• ERC Qualification;
• Why;
• Value Summary;
• public Meta/Observer summaries;
• and public-safe diagnostic geometry.

This report should be generated only from signed/public fields.

It should not include private subject identity, hidden prompts, raw traces, provider secrets, private scoring internals, or protected architecture.

3. Private Readable Diagnostic Report

A private/admin-readable report may include additional controlled context for internal review.

This can support deeper interpretation while still excluding secrets, raw hidden scoring logic, private keys, raw answer traces, or other sensitive internals.

[REDACTED — private/admin report structure and protected internal interpretation details]

4. Private Attestation

A private attestation can separately bind a client or subject identity to a signed public report.

This should not be merged into the public report.

It should not be published unless the named client or subject approves disclosure.

Current Interface Direction

The Trace Viewer is being shaped around clearer interpretation.

Instead of forcing users to interpret raw technical data first, the interface is moving toward simple result families such as:

• passed diagnostic read;
• partial diagnostic read;
• failed completed read;
• certified reliability read, when a tier threshold is actually met.

The interface also uses status language to separate different concepts:

• the diagnostic result;
• the integrity of the report;
• whether certification was assigned;
• whether the result is below, partial, blocked, or tier-qualified;
• and why the conclusion was reached.

This separation is important because a signed report, a diagnostic pass, and a certification tier are not the same thing.

Public-Safe Reporting Improvements

The public-facing report direction emphasizes:

• simple value summaries;
• readable status labels;
• color or status indicators for quick interpretation;
• public/private separation;
• signed report verification;
• client-friendly explanations;
• and technical details placed below the plain-language summary.

The goal is not to hide the technical trail.

The goal is to make the first read understandable while keeping deeper details available in controlled form.

[REDACTED — hidden scoring internals, private geometry details, and protected threshold logic]

Security and Hardening Direction

Implementation hardening has also been part of the work.

The system has undergone security-oriented review and patching, including host-behavior checks, dependency hardening, and test confirmation.

Exact local paths, test command details, version-specific security notes, and operational configuration are not shown here.

[REDACTED — private security patch details and local operational configuration]

The public-safe takeaway is that ERT is being developed with attention to report integrity, verification, replay safety, and controlled disclosure.

Continuing Work

This research is still continuing.

Ongoing expansion and experimentation include:

• additional diagnostic signals;
• clearer uncertainty and confidence interpretation;
• client-friendly report formats;
• user interface refinement;
• report verification and replay workflows;
• longitudinal comparison studies;
• public-safe ERT-Lite development;
• private/public report boundary testing;
• improved diagnostic summaries for nontechnical readers;
• calibration and consistency studies;
• observer false-positive review;
• and further experimentation around epistemic survivability.

Some deeper areas remain protected for IP, safety, and responsible disclosure reasons.

[REDACTED — protected architecture, future diagnostic mechanisms, and non-public implementation details]