Proposal boundary
Models, agents, tools, robots, and scientific-agent workflows submit typed proposals or claim records before consequence.
G‑14 Platform
Proof-carrying control for AI.
G‑14 gives AI systems an external admission boundary: check evidence, gate the action or conclusion, require repair when needed, and issue an auditable receipt for every consequential decision.
ProposeCheckRepairHoldRejectReceipt
Platform admission chain Proof required
Evidence and authority check
The platform evaluates policy, source constraints, confidence, freshness, custody, release authority, and repair requirements.
Admission decision
G‑14 can proceed, hold, correct, re-query, reject, or release through a configured effect or communication channel.
Proof-bearing record
Receipts bind proposal, decision, evidence, repair path, timing, outcome, and verifier boundary for later review.
Where the same platform applies
One proof-carrying control pattern across action and communication.
The platform is broader than TargetLock. TargetLock proves the pattern around physical AI; the same pattern governs agent communication, scientific reconstruction, and enterprise actions that require admissibility before reliance.
Robot commands, AMR routes, humanoid manipulation, industrial-cell actions, and shared-zone entry.
TargetLock proof receiptsAgent communication, reconstruction, claim repair, witnessable rejection, and evidence-backed conclusions.
Semantic receiptsTool calls, data writes, approval workflows, deployments, customer-impacting decisions, and evidence exports.
Action receiptsClaim disciplineThe platform has to pass its own proof standard.
Review proof model G‑14 is designed to sit around customer AI systems, not replace the foundation model or agent stack.
The public claim is only as strong as the receipt, packet, or artifact a reviewer can inspect.
Physical action and agent communication use the same certified-control pattern: evidence, gate, witness, proof.
Standards language describes evidence mappings and readiness posture, not completed certification unless separately documented.
Evaluation path
Start with one consequential workflow, not a platform migration.
A useful platform review begins with one action or communication path: what can be proposed, what evidence is required, what must be repaired or blocked, and what proof must survive outside the UI.