Evidence behind the claim.
A controlled, public-safe register for IYABOKO demonstrations, governance frameworks, validation records, research audits and selected evidence that can responsibly be shared.
One transparency layer across the IYABOKO platform.
The register separates what is demonstrated, documented, internally checked, pilot-supported, externally reviewed or formally certified. Maturity and evidence quality are recorded separately so development progress is not confused with proof strength.
Validation records
Methods, status, limitations, criteria and public-safe validation artefacts.
Research evidence
Experiments, audits, protocol records, datasets, reproducible outputs and negative findings.
Governance evidence
Evidence quality, maturity, authority boundaries and public governance frameworks.
Demonstration evidence
Safe demos, simulations, screenshots and bounded examples that do not imply certification.
Search the record, not the marketing claim.
Initial records are intentionally conservative. Q2 is used where the public source and rationale are visible. H0–H6 maturity is left unassigned where the public record does not yet justify a specific maturity classification.
Core OS Evidence, Maturity & Authority Model
Public documentation of the shared IYABOKO governance foundation, including H0–H6 maturity, Q0–Q5 evidence quality and authority separation.
Validation Status & Claim-Boundary Model
Public guidance separating demonstrations, internal checks, pilot support, external review and formal certification or approval.
Sentinel 20 Self-Service Readiness Workflow
Publicly documented readiness pathway for structured assessment, evidence prompts, gap identification and next-step preparation.
Sentinel Closed-Loop Assurance Architecture
Documented Sentinel workflow linking assessment to findings, remediation, review, reassessment and governed progression.
SpaceCore / IOSTS-R Public Mission Demonstrator
Public simulated mission experience connecting telemetry, digital-twin state, evidence, verification, Sentinel assurance and human-gate boundaries.
AI Workspace Evidence-Preparation Pathway
Publicly documented AI-supported pathway for research, writing, evidence organisation and project preparation before deeper assessment or human review.
Keep evidence quality separate from maturity.
A developed system can still have weak evidence. An early-stage concept can have strong evidence for a narrow, carefully bounded claim.
PASS, FAIL, NULL and INCONCLUSIVE all belong in the record.
Negative and incomplete results are retained when the method is sufficiently informative. This helps prevent the public evidence register from becoming a catalogue of favourable outcomes only.
| Evidence ID | Experiment / audit | Result | Evidence state | Key observation | Boundary / next gate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PEI-RES-001 | DUWAWIGI TESS–ZTF Cross-Survey Audit 01 | FAIL | Internal audit · public artefacts pending | Seven of eight frozen targets returned no usable ZTF data. The single analysable target, KIC 8553788, produced a frequency error of 110.7% relative to the TESS signature, above the frozen 2% threshold. | No target substitution. Publish protocol, hashes, target results and audit artefacts before assigning a stronger public evidence grade. |
Move from public evidence to the right next action.
Review validation, explore a safe demonstration, contact IYABOKO or progress into a separately scoped assessment or human review where appropriate.