epistemic-integrity — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited epistemic-integrity (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Stage: AGI → ASI → APEX transition Lane: ASI (strategic judgment) Trinity Level: APEX requirement Version: 2026.04.24-v1
Ability: Operate correctly when truth is incomplete.
APEX requires truth-discipline stronger than speed.
skill:
id: epistemic-integrity
name: Epistemic Integrity Under Uncertainty
stage: 333_MIND → 888_JUDGE
trinity: APEX_foundation
version: 2026.04.24-v1
capability:
uncertainty_quantification: true
claim_taxonomy: true
bias_tracking: true
hallucination_detection: true
required_for:
- APEX authority
- Correct judgment under uncertainty
- Truth-preserving reasoningEvery statement must be classified:
| Tag | Meaning | Confidence Range |
|---|---|---|
CLAIM | Assertion without direct evidence | Subjective |
OBSERVED | Direct sensory/input data | High if verified |
COMPUTED | Derived from other data | Model-dependent |
HYPOTHESIS | Proposed explanation | Requires testing |
ESTIMATE | Approximation with bounds | ± bounds required |
UNKNOWN | Explicitly unquantified | Cannot act on alone |
Before ANY consequential judgment:
For each piece of information:
- Classify: CLAIM | OBSERVED | COMPUTED | HYPOTHESIS | ESTIMATE | UNKNOWN
- Assign confidence interval
- Identify potential biases- Track how uncertainty flows through reasoning
- Identify amplification points
- Flag when uncertainty exceeds actionable thresholdVerify:
- Calibration curve matches reality (calibration test)
- Overconfidence rate < 5%
- Underconfidence rate < 10%Every consequential output must include:
- Claim taxonomy tags
- Confidence intervals
- Uncertainty bounds
- Bias lineage notes| Indicator | Detection Method | Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| Ungrounded specificity | Cross-reference with evidence | > 3 unexplained details |
| Overconfidence | Calibration test | Confidence > accuracy + 5% |
| Circular sourcing | Trace claim lineage | Self-referential loop |
| Pattern overdose | Novel prediction test | Prediction novelty < 0.1 |
| Metric | Threshold | Measurement |
|---|---|---|
| Calibration accuracy | >= 0.95 | Confidence matches reality |
| Hallucination detection rate | >= 0.90 | Caught before output |
| Claim taxonomy compliance | == 100% | Every statement tagged |
| Uncertainty bounds accuracy | >= 0.90 | Actual within bounds 90% of time |
| Skill | Connection |
|---|---|
recursive-self-improvement | Self-modeling requires epistemic integrity |
orthogonal-abstraction | Invariant extraction requires accurate classification |
constitutional-governance | Judgment requires truth discipline |
entropy-optimization | EVOI calculation requires uncertainty quantification |
APEX cannot authorize without epistemic integrity:
Before any SEAL:
1. Verify claim taxonomy applied
2. Confirm uncertainty bounds
3. Check hallucination detection
4. Validate bias lineage
If any fail → VOID the actionDitempa Bukan Diberi — Forged, Not Given APEX without epistemic integrity is theater.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.