proving-claims

Mapping claims to evidence requires inputs like basis.md, trace.md, and verification.md. The process converts each claim into a traceable row recording its basis, evidence type, and status, distinguishing between facts, assumptions, and unknowns to produce an explicit release posture.

No, you cannot use passing CI as sole proof for release claims. The approach cautions against treating green CI as proof and requires mapping claims to specific evidence, distinguishing between local proof, source claims, and decision authority to ensure genuine audit readiness.

To document unsupported claims before a release, map each claim to its evidence and assign statuses such as gap or deferred. This separates facts from assumptions and unknowns, ensuring unsupported claims are explicit and residual risks are recorded for disciplined decision-making.

Yes, claim-to-evidence traceability applies to code changes, release packets, or any claim requiring independent verification. It maps claims to artifacts in trace.md and verification.md, ensuring every important claim can be traced and unsupported claims are made explicit for audit readiness.

You need basis.md, trace.md, verification.md, and ship.md as inputs to generate a release posture from claim verification. These artifacts enable the mapping of claims to evidence types and statuses, resulting in a recommended ship posture with explicit residual risks.

Avoid using automated claim mapping when it leads to fabricating evidence or treating green CI as proof. The approach requires distinguishing between facts, assumptions, and unknowns, and mandates independent verification to ensure unsupported claims are explicit and audit-ready.