Computable·Authority
← Module 4 · Executable Authority

Lecture 4.3

Verification

Verification is confirmation by a party who did not execute the decision. This lecture examines what must be recorded for verification to be possible without access to the executing system.

Supports Law 6 — Every Automated Decision Must Be Independently Verifiable. →

Learning objectives

After this lesson, the reader should understand:

  • 01Define the minimum verifiable record of a decision.
  • 02Distinguish verification from audit and from explanation.
  • 03Design a verification path for an external regulator.

Concept framework

The verifiable record

  1. 01Artifact identity and version
  2. 02Facts evaluated and their provenance
  3. 03Evaluation trace
  4. 04Outcome
  5. 05Independent re-execution

Case study

A regulator re-runs a year of decisions

What would a regulator need in order to re-execute last year's decisions without your systems?

The artifact versions in force at each point in time, the recorded facts, and a conforming runtime. Nothing about your infrastructure, your model, or your staff. If re-execution requires your cooperation to interpret anything, the record is an explanation rather than a verification — and explanations do not survive disputes.

Discussion questions

  • Should verification be open to the decision subject as well as the regulator?
  • What is disclosed and what is withheld in a verification record?
  • Who certifies a conforming runtime?

Exercise

Construct a verification record for one decision.

  1. 01Assemble artifact version, facts, trace, and outcome.
  2. 02Remove anything that depends on your systems to interpret.
  3. 03Hand it to a colleague and ask them to reach the same outcome.
  4. 04Record what they had to ask you.

Research notes

  • Audit theory and evidential sufficiency.
  • Verifiable computation and proof-carrying results.
  • Regulatory supervision of automated systems.
All lectures in this moduleGlossary of terms