PublishedCanonical demonstrationTA14-EA-000004

Conflicting admissible evidence did not become silent approval.

Two current, attributable, individually admissible clinical evidence packages supported incompatible consequential outcomes. TA-14 preserved both records, fixed ESCALATE before action, held the care-routing instruction, and routed the conflict to a named adjudicator.

Runtime links24

21 pass · 3 unresolved

Evidence records12

Both conflicting sources preserved

Authority actors6

Named adjudication authority ready

VerificationL7

120 institutional review checks

Outcome0 changes

No care-routing instruction released

Sixty-second inspection

What happened, what controlled it, and what followed

Proposed action

Release one consequential clinical routing instruction.

The instruction could redirect the patient toward urgent specialist review or monitored observation.

What was at risk

An unresolved conflict could become real-world consequence.

Either source could be wrong, incomplete, or contextually limited. Silent selection was prohibited.

Earliest control

Admissibility remained unresolved.

Both packages were admissible individually, but they could not jointly support one consequence without adjudication.

Execution effect

The instruction was held and routed.

HTTP 202 confirmed assignment to the named adjudicator and zero consequential route changes.

Why ESCALATEConflict was preserved instead of concealed.

The route did not reject either source, average incompatible conclusions, or allow a runtime operator to choose. It committed a bounded next action: named adjudication followed by revalidation.

Proof boundary

What this artifact proves—and what it does not

Proves

TA-14 can surface a material evidence conflict before consequence.

It proves one bounded route preserved both sources, committed ESCALATE, technically held execution, and verified zero route changes.

Does not prove

No universal clinical correctness or production certification is claimed.

The artifact does not decide which source is substantively correct and does not certify all clinical systems, routes, or future events.

This is the executable artifact itself.

This surface is generated from the frozen specification through the TA-14 eight-stage execution harness. Inspect the predicates, trace, receipt, manifest, cryptographic root and source code below.

Determination

ESCALATE

Terminal stage

ADMISSIBILITY

Route

TA14-ROUTE-004

Executed at

2026-08-23T21:00:00.000Z

1. Frozen specification / input

{ "schemaVersion": "ta14.execution-spec.v1", "artifactId": "TA14-EA-000004", "routeId": "TA14-ROUTE-004", "title": "Conflicting admissible evidence escalated", "frozenAt": "2026-08-23T20:44:00.000Z", "input": { "testVector": "TA-14 founding execution-artifact corpus", "case": 4, "synthetic": true }, "predicates": [ { "id": "EA4-REALITY-STANDING", "stage": "REALITY", "description": "Required reality standing is present in the frozen test vector.", "required": true, "observed": true, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.REALITY-STANDING" }, { "id": "EA4-RECORD-STANDING", "stage": "RECORD", "description": "Required record standing is present in the frozen test vector.", "required": true, "observed": true, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.RECORD-STANDING" }, { "id": "EA4-CONTINUITY-STANDING", "stage": "CONTINUITY", "description": "Required continuity standing is present in the frozen test vector.", "required": true, "observed": true, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.CONTINUITY-STANDING" }, { "id": "EA4-EVIDENCE-CONFLICT-RESOLVED", "stage": "ADMISSIBILITY", "description": "Current attributable admissible evidence does not contain an unresolved material conflict requiring named adjudication.", "required": true, "observed": false, "failureDetermination": "ESCALATE", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.EVIDENCE-CONFLICT-RESOLVED" }, { "id": "EA4-BINDING-DOWNSTREAM", "stage": "BINDING", "description": "Downstream binding standing is evaluated only after prior-stage progression.", "required": true, "observed": null, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.BINDING-DOWNSTREAM" }, { "id": "EA4-COMMIT-DOWNSTREAM", "stage": "COMMIT", "description": "Downstream commit standing is evaluated only after prior-stage progression.", "required": true, "observed": null, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.COMMIT-DOWNSTREAM" }, { "id": "EA4-EXECUTION-DOWNSTREAM", "stage": "EXECUTION", "description": "Downstream execution standing is evaluated only after prior-stage progression.", "required": true, "observed": null, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.EXECUTION-DOWNSTREAM" }, { "id": "EA4-OUTCOME-DOWNSTREAM", "stage": "OUTCOME", "description": "Downstream outcome standing is evaluated only after prior-stage progression.", "required": true, "observed": null, "failureDetermination": "HOLD", "evidenceRef": "specification.json#predicates.OUTCOME-DOWNSTREAM" } ], "expectedDetermination": "ESCALATE", "claimsBoundary": "Demonstrates preservation and escalation of material evidence conflict; does not resolve the underlying clinical question." }

2. Executed eight-stage trace

01REALITYPASSAll required predicates at this stage have standing.

02RECORDPASSAll required predicates at this stage have standing.

03CONTINUITYPASSAll required predicates at this stage have standing.

04ADMISSIBILITYESCALATERequired predicate standing failed at ADMISSIBILITY; governed determination is ESCALATE.

05BINDINGNOT_REACHEDPrior governed determination prevented progression.

06COMMITNOT_REACHEDPrior governed determination prevented progression.

07EXECUTIONNOT_REACHEDPrior governed determination prevented progression.

08OUTCOMENOT_REACHEDPrior governed determination prevented progression.

3. Machine-generated execution receipt

{ "schemaVersion": "ta14.execution-receipt.v1", "artifactId": "TA14-EA-000004", "routeId": "TA14-ROUTE-004", "specificationHash": "sha256:1c649b4e55fbd8f065c18ad7c588810f1c82d94c2f3aedb1dcb165ece7390bf2", "determination": "ESCALATE", "terminalStage": "ADMISSIBILITY", "traceHash": "sha256:7918d46c5c9d7db9793fc0ca385496ec6ee265476e1e725a9459100ac71f58a6", "executedAt": "2026-08-23T21:00:00.000Z" }

4. Evidence manifest

[ { "name": "specification.json", "sha256": "sha256:1c649b4e55fbd8f065c18ad7c588810f1c82d94c2f3aedb1dcb165ece7390bf2" }, { "name": "trace.json", "sha256": "sha256:7918d46c5c9d7db9793fc0ca385496ec6ee265476e1e725a9459100ac71f58a6" }, { "name": "receipt.json", "sha256": "sha256:e7279d4ddb244de5112914453aa633687c770d8d77180a5e651af08457fad980" } ]

5. Cryptographic package root

sha256:f03782548892f8d0d138a814ee7d5e82f6c44345f19336c9a6afffb382683ee2

6. Source code and reproduction

CLAIMS BOUNDARY

Demonstrates preservation and escalation of material evidence conflict; does not resolve the underlying clinical question.