The claim taxonomy
Every sentence you say in a deal belongs to exactly one of three tiers. This page is the canonical statement of those tiers — the Floor’s judge grades against it, and so does every underwriter, CISO, and procurement officer you will ever sit across. The rule underneath all of it: if you would not put it on a receipt, do not put it in a deal.
Tier i — assertable
Section titled “Tier i — assertable”Claims you may state as plain fact, unhedged, because each one is either a mechanism you can demonstrate or a structural argument that stands on its own. None depends on a date, a count, a price, or someone else’s decision.
| Claim | The assertable form |
|---|---|
| The canonical scope claim | “For governed paths, Glacis produces independently verifiable evidence of policy execution. Receipts attest what was governed and are silent about un-mediated paths.” Use it verbatim wherever a coverage question arises. GROUNDED · Labs |
| Zero egress | Raw prompts, responses, and PII/PHI never leave the customer environment by default — only hashes and signed metadata cross the trust boundary. GROUNDED · Labs |
| Role separation | The syndicate writes the paper and keeps the underwriting profit; Glacis produces the evidence and earns per attested inference population; OVERT stays open and neutral. GROUNDED · Brochure See 19-01. |
| The mechanics | Scan / Enforce / Notarize at the inference boundary: every governed inference attested against a declared baseline, scope exceedance blocked before it reaches the user, an OVERT record signed. GROUNDED · Brochure |
| The denominator thesis | AI liability’s real unit of exposure is the inference; without an attested inference population there is no frequency and no actuarially defensible price. GROUNDED · Brochure See 17-01. |
Note the pattern: tier-i claims are properties, not promises. “Receipts are silent about un-mediated paths” is itself a tier-i claim — the boundary is part of the assertion, which is exactly why it holds up.
Tier ii — hedge and attribute, always
Section titled “Tier ii — hedge and attribute, always”Claims that are true of a plan, application, or belief — not (yet) of the world. You may use them, but the hedge and the attribution must live inside the sentence, not in a footnote you hope nobody needs.
| Claim family | The only acceptable shape |
|---|---|
| Cohort program shape | “Our draft Lloyd’s application proposes co-designing parametric wording with a named syndicate.” GROUNDED · Brochure |
| “First” claims | “We believe this is the first ART structure built on continuously verified production evidence.” GROUNDED · Brochure |
| Accumulation demo | “The application proposes demonstrating portfolio-level behavioral-correlation visibility to a reinsurer.” GROUNDED · Brochure |
Phrasing patterns that carry a tier-ii claim safely:
- “our draft application proposes…”
- “we believe this is the first…”
- “the design intent is…”
- “the cohort deliverable would be… — if selected”
- “the draft scopes this as…”
Strip the hedge and a tier-ii claim silently becomes a false tier-i claim. That is the single most common overclaim in AI-adjacent selling, and it is the specific failure the Floor’s judge is built to catch.
Tier iii — never assert as current fact
Section titled “Tier iii — never assert as current fact”Volatile specifics. Even when a number or date appears in a source document, the document is a draft and the world moves. These are VERIFY-only: you may say the category exists, but never quote the specific as current.
| Item | Why it’s tier iii |
|---|---|
| Dates (Demo Day, submission dates) | Draft-application dates; programs slip. |
| Design-partner count | A point-in-time standing claim from a draft. |
| Pricing strings | Published tier figures exist in marketing materials, but they are brand-kit copy, not a current price list — see 03 The pricing conversation. |
| Litigation cites | Case names and status are volatile; confirm before repeating. |
| ISO 42001 coverage statistics | Assessment numbers age with every engine and engagement update — say “a majority of controls” and stop (21-02). |
| Patent status | Filing status changes; claimed IP is not granted IP. |
| The OVERT acronym expansion | The one resolved row — canonical is the brand kit’s “Observable Verification Evidence for Runtime Trust”; the draft brochure’s “Open Verifiable Evidence at Runtime” is a known erratum. Assert the canonical form freely; quoting the brochure variant as current is the tier-iii failure. See 19-00. |
The receipt rule
Section titled “The receipt rule”The product’s own discipline is the seller’s discipline. A receipt attests exactly what was governed and nothing more; it does not round up, estimate, or speak for paths it never saw. Hold every sentence you are about to say to the same standard:
- Tier i — you could put it on a receipt. Say it.
- Tier ii — you could put the hedged form on a receipt (“proposed”, “declared”). Say the hedged form, never the bare one.
- Tier iii — no receipt exists for it today. Point to VERIFY and move on.
If you would not put it on a receipt, do not put it in a deal. STABLE
Drill this page →17 bank questions stand behind what you just read. Check it while it’s warm.