Deterministic Scientific Claim Gate

CAPAS decides whether
declared evidence licenses a claim.

CAPAS compiles supplied evidence into a claim admissibility decision. It does not determine truth. It returns ACCEPT, REWRITE, REJECT, or HOLD with a re-derivable audit trail and no language model in the verdict. First market: statistical claims in regulated submissions.

CAPAS checks whether supplied evidence is internally consistent and re-derivable. It does not certify scientific truth, compliance, authorship, or data authenticity. A consistent fabrication passes: the GIGO ceiling.

Reference Gate Decisions SCHEMA V3
ACCEPT statistical_confidence: p=0.03 <= alpha=0.05, direction confirmed 09922342
REWRITE threshold passes; effect direction not licensed fd3cf4bd
REJECT artifact unavailable for reproducibility d7f44fda
HOLD incomplete evidence · fail-closed 08e7c90a
Engine output. Re-derive every verdict and hash: python3 benchmarks/home_gate_decisions.py
26
Cross-domain invariant gates
10
Domains, one engine
0
LLM in the verdict · fail-closed (tested)
100%
Re-derivable, replayable
Every number is CLOSED (proven by a test), BACKED (regenerates with a hash), or SCOPED (empirical result pending). Source: the proof ledger.

A deterministic filter for AI-made errors in research claims. Blind run, engine frozen at the sealed tag: 53 of 82 bad claims stopped, 51 of 63 good claims not rejected.

Corpus: 233 research claims written by AI sessions under human governance in a sister project’s repository. 50 were excluded as contaminated because the coder could see the outcome; 183 were scored. Each claim carries the file and commit where it was asserted. A separate session coded the claims blind. The engine was frozen at a git tag before coding and the verdicts were sealed by hash before the outcomes were opened. No language model in the verdict. Outcomes are the project’s own later corrections, not an external oracle. n is small and the intervals reflect it.

53 / 82
Bad claims not accepted (65%), blind, X1–3.
51 / 63
Good claims not rejected (81%), blind, X1–3.
17 / 21 · 16 / 17
Out-of-sample (X4+X5), engine frozen before coding. Wilson 95%: [0.60–0.92] and [0.73–0.99].
  • Not a fraud detector, and we measured it: on 888 clean papers vs 6,348 retracted ones, recomputable numeric inconsistencies did not separate the groups. CAPAS checks the structure of evidence; a consistent fabrication passes (the GIGO ceiling).
  • The gate reads the claim text only through a fixed list of patterns, and those patterns can only lower a verdict. It decides on declared fields. What is not declared ends in HOLD or REWRITE, never in ACCEPT.
  • Rules added after a failure make the sealed claims training data. Each false-accept becomes a required field and a regression test. The figures above belong to the engine frozen at the sealed tag. A re-score with a later engine is in-sample and is never published as the blind rate. A new rule earns credit only on the next sealed batch; until then the blind rate of the current engine is unknown.

A third party can re-derive these figures from the public files: sealed verdicts, outcome labels and evidence fields in research/ginibre_corpus/public. Each claim text is published as a sha256 hash only, because the paper is unpublished. Replayed with the engine at each frozen tag (ginibre-ciego-v1 to v6), the redacted payloads reproduce 232 of 233 sealed verdicts. Not checkable by a third party: the sealing times and the tag dates, which the author recorded. The full ledger, the limits and what is not validated: CAPAS in depth →

Four-step workflow

From claim draft to admissibility decision in one deterministic pass.

01
Claim drift
A paper reports association. A dataset row records causation. CAPAS enforces the boundary when the claim is declared as a causal claim type or uses a phrase on its fixed pattern list.
02
Select mode
Guided builder, raw JSON, batch evaluation, or claim-candidate extraction (deterministic preview, human confirmation).
03
Run gate
Schema v3 and claim-type rules return ACCEPT, REWRITE, REJECT, or HOLD with full provenance.
04
Inspect decision
Review the verdict, schema errors and provenance blockers; complete the evidence fields.

Four possible outcomes

Every gate run returns exactly one of these. Each carries a machine-readable reason trail.

ACCEPT

Claim is admissible

All schema constraints pass. The declared evidence licenses a statement generated from the declared fields; the original sentence is never carried. No licensing or reproducibility blockers.

p_value=0.03, alpha=0.05
effect_direction_confirmed: true
→ ACCEPT · audit_hash ff23bfcc
REWRITE

Claim needs adjustment

Evidence is present but the claim overreaches. Direction, scope, or causal language must be corrected before resubmission.

p_value=0.03, alpha=0.05
effect_direction_confirmed: false
→ REWRITE · audit_hash 2a2c5234
REJECT

Claim is inadmissible

Critical evidence is missing, contradicted, or irreproducible. The claim cannot be licensed in its current form.

artifact_available: false
independent_reproduction_pass: false
→ REJECT · audit_hash 1cc473f8
HOLD

Pending verification

Evidence is incomplete or no external oracle is available; the gate returns HOLD.

p_value=0.03, alpha=0.05
effect_direction_confirmed: (missing)
→ HOLD · audit_hash 9033f4c1

Structured admissibility gating for scientific claims

Each verdict re-derives to the same audit hash on any machine; no model score is involved.

What CAPAS is NOT

Not a fact-checker. CAPAS validates evidence licensing and schema compliance, not truth.

Not a plagiarism detector. CAPAS checks admissibility, not citation matching.

Not an LLM wrapper. The decision path makes no language model calls.

Not a replacement for peer review. CAPAS runs before editorial judgment, not instead of it.

What CAPAS IS

A deterministic claim admissibility gate. The same input produces the same output.

A schema enforcement layer. CAPAS Schema v3 defines a valid evidence package.

A provenance audit tool. Every blocker is machine-readable and exportable.

An API for research pipelines, publishing workflows and audit systems.

Every decision is an audit artifact

CAPAS produces an auditable evidence trail for each decision. Every verdict carries an action: ACCEPT licenses reuse · REWRITE returns the corrected claim with an Original→Licensed diff · REJECT names the missing evidence fields · HOLD lists the obligations to resolve before reuse.

"claim_id": "claim_drift_001",
"claim_type": "causal_mechanism_claim",
"decision": "REJECT",
"evidence_contract": "intervention_or_natural_experiment + temporal_order + confounders + mechanism",
"reason": "causal claim lacks intervention/natural-experiment evidence or temporal order",
"audit_hash": "sha256:392234b5fb245c166f0e2dd46b9bc1ffff1f2c6d52b20cd3b8f0b9ea6667034d",
"re_derive": "python3 benchmarks/home_gate_decisions.py"

Run a first claim through the gate

Load a sample payload or build an evidence contract. The pilot requires no account.