Published before anyone was scored

The rubric

Every score point has an anchor. That is what makes exact agreement between validators reachable, and a score against a standard nobody can read is worth nothing.

rubricv1 - 10 criteria in all - 5 per subject - 0 to 2 each - 10 points per subject

contract0x1708a7382FC7c5B89626a83A21DAF26f44c2833d - studio

bands0+ unfit - 4+ workable - 7+ strong - 9+ exemplary

What agreement means

Two validators mark the same source independently. They count as agreeing when no criterion differs by more than 1, at most 1 criterion differs at all, and the band is identical. The total is summed by the contract, in deterministic code, from the leader's marks. The reasons are not compared - two validators reading the same code write the same judgment in different words.

Counted, or judged

4 of these criteria are counted from the source in deterministic code - agreement - untrusted - boundary - failure - so every validator derives the same score and the same reason without asking a model. The rest are judged: necessity - finality - mechanism - provenance - overreach - recourse. Every mark below says which it is.

The contract

The agreement rule fits what is being agreedagreementcounted

0strict equality over raw web output, or no stated rule at all

1a rule is chosen but it is looser or tighter than the output needs

2the output is collapsed to a stable shape before consensus sees it

Needs GenLayer at allnecessityjudged

0the answer is computed elsewhere and the contract only records it

1the network is asked something one deterministic call could answer

2many nodes agreeing on what a page claimed is the product

Untrusted text is fenced before a model reads ituntrustedcounted

0text written by an interested party reaches the prompt with its structure intact

1the text is clipped or tidied, which changes its length but not its shape

2the characters that could close a block are neutralised at the prompt boundary

The non-deterministic boundary is drawn onceboundarycounted

0model and web calls are scattered through the flow

1the calls are grouped, but stored state is read inside the block without a copy

2one block per decision, with stored data copied to memory before it

The failure branches existfailurecounted

0nothing is raised and every path assumes the happy one

1the obvious refusals raise, and a timeout or an empty answer does not

2every branch that can fail raises something a reader could act on

The site

Accepted is told apart from finalizedfinalityjudged

0a transaction is called done the moment it is sent

1the page waits for acceptance and calls that final

2the two states are named separately and the wait is visible

The page says what the network decidesmechanismjudged

0the page says AI, or blockchain, and stops there

1the mechanism is named once, somewhere a reader has to go looking

2the decision the validators make is stated where the decision is shown

The contract behind the page is reachableprovenancejudged

0no address, no source, nothing a reader could check

1an address appears, with no link and no network named beside it

2the address, the network and the source are all one click away

No claim outruns what the contract doesoverreachjudged

0the page claims something the contract has no method for

1a claim is true as written and reads as more than it is

2every claim on the page maps to a call the contract exposes

What happens when a decision goes against a reader is statedrecoursejudged

0the losing path is not mentioned anywhere

1an appeal is mentioned without saying who may start one, or when

2the window, the cost and who may act are all stated

When validators disagree

No report is issued and the splitting criterion is named. That is a signal the anchor is written badly, our problem rather than the submitter's.

Criterion	Subject	Splits	Reads as
agreement	contract	-	counted, never judged
boundary	contract	-	counted, never judged
failure	contract	-	counted, never judged
finality	site	0	clear
mechanism	site	0	clear
necessity	contract	0	clear
overreach	site	0	clear
provenance	site	0	clear
recourse	site	0	clear
untrusted	contract	-	counted, never judged

0 reports - 0 contested - 0 splits recorded - rubric v1