← Signature systems
~/proofdeterministic · synthetic

Cite or refuse, walked through.

Two questions against the same five records. One is answered, every claim carrying its sources. One is refused, with the missing evidence named.

This is a deterministic, synthetic walkthrough of the system’s decision contract, not a connection to a production model or customer environment. Every company, name, record, and date is invented.

Who approved invoice #4417, and under what authority?

cite: every claim below carries its sources

the answer

  1. Invoice #4417, issued by Northgate Marine Services for AED 148,500, was approved for out-of-hours payment on 12 March 2025.

    sourcesR1R2

  2. The approval was given by Dana Okafor, Financial Controller.

    sourcesR1R3

  3. The payment was executed at 21:47, inside the processing window named in the approval email.

    sourcesR3R1

  4. The approval sat within delegated authority: policy §4.2 permits the Financial Controller to approve out-of-hours payments above AED 100,000 with written confirmation, which the email provides.

    sourcesR4R1

the gate

The outcome is derived from whether the retrieved records satisfy the question’s required evidence categories.

required

  • payment approval(satisfied)
  • approver identity(satisfied)
  • authority delegation(satisfied)

retrieved

R1R2R3R4

the trace

  1. routeQuestion classified as factual and answerable from payment records; routed to retrieval over the payments corpus.
  2. retrieveFour records surfaced: the approval email (R1), the invoice (R2), the payments access log (R3), and the delegation policy (R4).
  3. reasonAnswer assembled as four discrete claims; each claim linked to the records that support it.
  4. decideEvery required evidence category is satisfied by a retrieved record → cite. Each claim ships with its sources.

outcome: cite

Had Northgate supplied Meridian before 2024?

refuse: the gap is named, not papered over

the refusal

refusedcan’t support that

The retrieved records establish who the vendor is and when it was onboarded, but nothing covers supply history before 2024. Rather than infer from absence, the system declines and names the gap.

Missing evidence
pre-2024 supply history
Closest retrieved records
R5R2retrieved, read, and still not enough, so no answer.

the gate

The outcome is derived from whether the retrieved records satisfy the question’s required evidence categories.

required

  • vendor identity(satisfied)
  • pre-2024 supply history(missing)

retrieved

R5R2

the trace

  1. routeQuestion classified as a historical vendor query; routed to retrieval over the vendor and payments corpora.
  2. retrieveTwo records surfaced: the vendor account notes (R5) and the invoice (R2): both about the vendor, neither about pre-2024.
  3. reasonNo retrieved record supports any claim about pre-2024 supply. Absence of evidence is not treated as evidence.
  4. decideRequired category “pre-2024 supply history” is unsatisfied → refuse, stating exactly what is missing.

outcome: refuse

the real thing

This is the decision contract of The Careful Machine, the production system this page abstracts. Same decision principle, same refusal discipline, real evidence instead of invented records.

Read the system deep-diveGet in touch