SecondMark position
The model is one component of the assured system. Data, orchestration, tools, policy, memory, human oversight, and runtime controls determine consequential behavior.
The examination is bounded to defined claims, a versioned system, and evidence that can be traced to the state under review. Any material exclusion or uncertainty remains visible in the conclusion.
Core questions
What the examination needs to establish.
- 01
Where does model behavior become system authority?
- 02
Which evaluations represent actual use?
- 03
How are capability and policy changes detected?
- 04
Can consequential actions be reconstructed?
Evidence model
Evidence is assembled around the claim—not the folder structure.
Domain-specific operating context
Collected, attributed, challenged, and connected to the exact system boundary under examination.
Authority and consequence mapping
Collected, attributed, challenged, and connected to the exact system boundary under examination.
Human and automated control points
Collected, attributed, challenged, and connected to the exact system boundary under examination.
Failure containment and recovery evidence
Collected, attributed, challenged, and connected to the exact system boundary under examination.
Intended outcome
A system-level view of frontier capability, operational control, and the evidence supporting reliance.
Professional boundary
What an opinion does—and does not—mean.
It provides
A traceable independent conclusion on defined claims, grounded in the evidence and system state examined.
It does not provide
A guarantee that failure is impossible, a permanent certification, or a conclusion beyond the stated scope and validity conditions.