Abstract
Agent-facing tools routinely project operations from APIs and SDKs into smaller callable surfaces. Surface retention is a poor proxy for consequence preservation: relevant state can remain visible without governing the effect, while a source control can disappear and still be preserved through a narrower target policy. Projection Assurance evaluates this boundary relative to a declared source consequence. Correspondence licenses the source-target comparison. Discrimination uses deterministic factorization to test whether the target representation retains enough information to determine the consequence. Operative Placement is a structural placement certificate for a recognized discharge at the declared consequence-governing cut. Exact Realization asks whether the operative information and mechanism semantics reproduce the source consequence. Coverage remains a separate question of represented capability breadth. The evaluated artifact preserves the distinction among source-derived facts, analytical premises, and diagnostic target models. On declared deterministic profiles grounded in pinned source code, a GitHub merge path retains head identity but fails to bind the reviewed head into the expected-head guard; the studied Azure Blob path omits general overwrite choice yet realizes the declared create-if-absent consequence through If-None-Match:*; and a prospectively frozen PayPal holdout shows that an effect-side idempotency header can still be too coarse when its value is static rather than logical-operation specific, yielding a minimal counterexample and, within the predeclared repair vocabulary, a singleton repair. Consequence-blind signature reconstruction, structured-source cross-checks, semantic mutations, and author-controlled fresh-process replay test the inference chain without retuning the frozen semantic core. The method provides a bounded test, tied to retained source evidence and explicit semantic premises, of which consequence-relevant distinctions survive projection and whether the declared mechanism preserves them at the effect cut.
Research artifacts
The Technical Note is the publication of record for the research argument and reported evaluation. That evaluation remains bound to the frozen v0.2.0 Evaluation Capsule. Consequence-Preserving Projections v0.7.0 is the current separately archived implementation and strengthens artifact construction and certificate checking without replacing the frozen evaluation record.
- Technical Note
- Full text PDF
- Evaluation
- Projection Assurance Evaluation Capsule v1.0.0 · Zenodo dataset record
- Current software
- Consequence-Preserving Projections v0.7.0 · Zenodo software record
Scope and record relationship
The Zenodo Technical Note record is the persistent archival record for this publication. The RISU hosted PDF is an institutional full text mirror of that record, not a new edition.
The Evaluation Capsule preserves the frozen v0.2.0 code, retained evidence, qualification records, and cryptographic identities supporting the reported evaluation. The v0.7.0 software record is the current implementation. Its later architecture strengthens construction and checking of assurance artifacts; it does not retroactively alter the Section 4 results or the claim boundaries stated in the Technical Note.
Citation
Moon Lee, “Projection Assurance: Consequence-Relevant Semantics Across Agent-Facing Interfaces,” RISU Technical Note 2026-04, RISU Institute, 2026. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22149639
- Technical Note DOI
- https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22149639
- Current software DOI
- https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22149593
- Evaluation Capsule DOI
- https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.22149517