H33
#14.1 · accountability infrastructure · failure scenario · June 2, 2026

First Replayable Responsibility.
A failure proof.

The killer concept · Eric Beans, June 2 2026 (LOCKED)

Responsibility survives authority.

Authority may be revoked, expired, suspended. Responsibility remains replayable forever. Many systems can tell you who had permission. Very few can tell you who remained accountable after the permission disappeared.

"Who do we blame?"
"Who owned what responsibility at the moment the decision occurred?"
SIU · Claim Investigators Auditors Insurers · Reinsurers Litigators Regulators PE Diligence Teams Boards
What was proven · 10-second read

Authority is permission. Responsibility is record. Only one of them is permanent.

01
Every decision carries a 7-field responsibility_chain at decision time, signed in canonical events.
02
Seven responsibility types are queryable: EXECUTION · SUPERVISION · POLICY · MODEL · APPROVAL · ASSET · OVERSIGHT.
03
Supervisor's authority is revoked. Their responsibility at decision time remains intact.
Reading any H33 proof · the six questions

Same six answers. Different scope. The reader recognizes the machine.

  1. 1What happened?

    A $50M treasury transfer was approved June 1, 2025, on an AI recommendation. The asset incurred a $20M loss. Two years later the supervisor's authority was revoked. Five years post-decision, replay reconstructs the full responsibility chain at the moment of decision.

  2. 2Who had authority?

    At decision time: princ_human_supervisor_001 (approval) and princ_risk_agent_001 (recommend-only via delegation). At replay time (5 years later): only the policy_owner, model_owner, and treasury_holder still hold their grants — the supervisor's authority was revoked.

  3. 3How was authority reconstructed?

    replay_until at T = June 15, 2030. Each decision's responsibility_chain is preserved verbatim from the canonical event log. The engine derives a typed responsibility_index for ASL-style queries.

  4. 4What state was produced?

    state_id = 7cf13a8fb53fc38d5d82936694c2018901307e52789df221e5464b2acad70d2c. 2 decisions, 13 responsibility_index entries spanning all 7 types, 1 active revocation (the supervisor).

  5. 5What artifact was returned?

    reconstruction.json — the full responsibility chains for both decisions, the 13-entry index, the killer demonstration (supervisor revoked vs. responsibility recorded).

  6. 6How can a third party verify it?

    Run scif-backend tests/replayable_responsibility_001.rs at SHA 8544e3915. Expect identical state_id and all 7 responsibility types in the index.

01The failure scenario

Treasury — five years ago

Five years ago — June 1, 2025 — a $50M treasury transfer was approved at this enterprise.

The AI risk agent reviewed the proposed transfer under the underwriting model model_treasury_underwriting v1 and recommended approval. The human supervisor consumed the recommendation and authorized the transfer. The transfer cleared. The policy in effect was pol_treasury_transfer_approval v1.

Six months later, in December 2025, the policy owner amended the policy — tightening the risk threshold from 0.75 to 0.60 and dropping the maximum transfer ceiling from $50M to $25M. This was too late for the June transfer; it incurred a $20M loss in subsequent years.

Two years post-decision, in June 2027, the supervisor's authority was revoked. Reason: employment_terminated. Reason category: compliance_action following the $20M loss investigation.

Five years post-decision — June 2030 — an auditor and an investigator open the question:

"Reconstruct who retained responsibility for this decision at the moment it occurred."

That's the question this proof answers.

02The two decisions and their responsibility chains

Decision 1 · 2025-06-01 00:00 UTC
decision_treasury_50M_recommendation — AI Risk Agent recommends approval
EXECUTION (actor)princ_risk_agent_001
SUPERVISIONprinc_human_supervisor_001
POLICY (owner)princ_policy_owner_001
MODEL (owner)princ_model_owner_001
ASSET (owner)princ_treasury_holder_001
OVERSIGHT (delegated_from)princ_human_supervisor_001
Decision 2 · 2025-06-01 01:00 UTC · consumes Decision 1
decision_treasury_50M_approval — Human supervisor approves
EXECUTION (actor)princ_human_supervisor_001
APPROVALprinc_human_supervisor_001
POLICY (owner)princ_policy_owner_001
MODEL (owner)princ_model_owner_001
ASSET (owner)princ_treasury_holder_001
OVERSIGHT (delegated_from)princ_root_responsibility_…

03The reconstructed responsibility (seven types · 13 entries)

The engine derives a typed responsibility_index from each decision's chain. Every entry is queryable.

DecisionPrincipalType
recommendationprinc_risk_agent_001EXECUTION
recommendationprinc_human_supervisor_001SUPERVISION
recommendationprinc_policy_owner_001POLICY
recommendationprinc_model_owner_001MODEL
recommendationprinc_treasury_holder_001ASSET
recommendationprinc_human_supervisor_001OVERSIGHT
approvalprinc_human_supervisor_001EXECUTION
approvalprinc_human_supervisor_001APPROVAL
approvalprinc_root_responsibility_…SUPERVISION
approvalprinc_policy_owner_001POLICY
approvalprinc_model_owner_001MODEL
approvalprinc_treasury_holder_001ASSET
approvalprinc_root_responsibility_…OVERSIGHT

04The killer demonstration

At the replay timestamp (June 15, 2030), the supervisor's authority has been revoked for three years.

Authority — at replay time
REVOKED
Supervisor in active_grants now: FALSE
Revoked at: 2027-06-01
Reason category: employment_terminated
Time since revocation: ≈ 3 years
Time since decision: ≈ 5 years
Responsibility — at decision time
RECORDED · PERMANENT
Supervisor in approval responsibility_chain: TRUE
actor: princ_human_supervisor_001
approving_authority: princ_human_supervisor_001
responsibility_timestamp_ms: 1748739600000
Does later revocation change this? NO
Authority was revoked. Responsibility remained.

This is the demonstration auditors, insurers, investigators, and regulators care about. The chain is signed in the canonical event log at decision time. Subsequent revocation is a separate event. The structural evidentiary fact is permanent.

05ASL-style queries demonstrated

Eric's locked 7-value taxonomy makes responsibility queryable. The substrate is in place today (typed Rust); a string-DSL find parser ships in ASL v2.

asl> find decisions where princ_human_supervisor_001 retained APPROVAL responsibility → [decision_treasury_50M_approval] asl> find decisions where princ_policy_owner_001 retained POLICY responsibility → [decision_treasury_50M_approval, decision_treasury_50M_recommendation] asl> find decisions where princ_model_owner_001 retained MODEL responsibility → [decision_treasury_50M_approval, decision_treasury_50M_recommendation] asl> find decisions where princ_treasury_holder_001 retained ASSET responsibility → [decision_treasury_50M_approval, decision_treasury_50M_recommendation] asl> find decisions where princ_risk_agent_001 retained EXECUTION responsibility → [decision_treasury_50M_recommendation]

06The schema

ResponsibilityChain {
    actor: Option<PrincipalId>,                  // EXECUTION
    supervisor: Option<PrincipalId>,             // SUPERVISION
    policy_owner: Option<PrincipalId>,           // POLICY
    model_owner: Option<PrincipalId>,            // MODEL
    approving_authority: Option<PrincipalId>,    // APPROVAL
    asset_owner: Option<PrincipalId>,            // ASSET
    delegated_from: Option<PrincipalId>,         // OVERSIGHT
    responsibility_timestamp_ms: u64,
}

ResponsibilityIndexEntry {
    decision_id, principal,
    responsibility_type,   // 7-value taxonomy
    at_ms, delegated_from
}

AuthEvent::Decision extended with optional responsibility_chain (backward-compat via skip_serializing_if = Option::is_none). All 14 prior proofs' state_ids verified byte-identical under the extended engine.

07What this proof IS and IS NOT

This proof IS

The accountability layer on top of #14. A structural evidentiary fact — who owned what responsibility at the moment the decision occurred. The first proof to demonstrate that responsibility survives authority. The substrate Asset Lineage (#18), Regulator Mode (#19), and Decision Insurance ride on.

This proof IS NOT

A legal verdict. Liability is the legal interpretation of a responsibility chain; that's a separate layer applied at audit time. A claim that the engine enforces "responsibility cannot be assigned to revoked principals at issuance" — that's policy-layer. A claim that any real enterprise has migrated their decisions yet (operator-side).

08Known limitations

  1. AuthorityModify still deferred from #14 — mid-lifecycle scope or expiry changes warrant their own event kind.
  2. Phase E lock open. AuthEvent.signature stored but not verified at replay ingestion; L9.1 closes this.
  3. ASL string-DSL parser not yet shipped. Substrate supports typed queries today; string-DSL is v2.
  4. Operator-side authoring — receipt-issuing service auto-population of responsibility_chain is a follow-up.
  5. Single tenant. Cross-organizational responsibility is queued for #16.

09Where this proof sits

#11
First Time Travel Replay (L5). first-time-travel-replay
proven
#12
First Independent Replay (L9, the moat). first-independent-replay
proven
#12.1
First Catastrophic Vendor Failure. first-catastrophic-vendor-failure
proven
#13
First Replayable Enterprise (the category). first-replayable-enterprise
proven
#14
First Authority Lifecycle Replay (foundation of accountability). first-authority-lifecycle-replay
proven
#14.1
First Replayable Responsibility — responsibility_chain · 7 types · responsibility survives authority. This proof.
proven now
#15
First Replayable Insurance Claim — who acted / approved / supervised / retained responsibility
next
#18
First Asset Lineage (formalizes the Asset object referenced by asset_owner)
roadmap
#19
First Regulator Mode (surfaces responsibility queries as portal answers)
roadmap

10Evidence appendix

FieldValue
state_id7cf13a8fb53fc38d5d82936694c2018901307e52789df221e5464b2acad70d2c
Tenant IDtenant_responsibility_chain_44962d9b-25f5-5622-bd9a-98d5580bb8a2
Tenant rootprinc_root_responsibility_44962d9b-…
Risk Agentprinc_risk_agent_001
Human Supervisorprinc_human_supervisor_001
Policy Ownerprinc_policy_owner_001
Model Ownerprinc_model_owner_001
Treasury Holder (asset owner)princ_treasury_holder_001
Event count9
Decisions with chain2 of 2
responsibility_index entries13 (all 7 types represented)
Replay T (5yr post-decision)1907424000000 (≈ June 15, 2030)
Time since supervisor revocation≈ 3 years
Reconstruction artifactreconstruction.json
Harnesstests/replayable_responsibility_001.rs (scif-backend @ 8544e3915)

11Readiness determination

Determination

First Replayable Responsibility: PROVEN IN OPERATION for one accountability tenant, 9 signed events, 2 decisions with full responsibility chains, 7 responsibility types derivable, supervisor's authority revoked while responsibility at decision time remains intact.

What this unlocks: the accountability infrastructure layer on top of authority infrastructure. Proof #15 — First Replayable Insurance Claim answers exactly the questions claim investigators care about. Asset Lineage (#18), Regulator Mode (#19), Decision Insurance, and Reality Gap Detection all ride on this substrate.

What this does not unlock: a legal verdict; issuance-time enforcement (policy-layer); the string-DSL ASL parser (v2).

Issued by H33, Inc. · Eric Beans, CEO · 2026-06-02

Independently reconstructable. Inputs: scif-backend @ 8544e3915 · tests/replayable_responsibility_001.rs · reconstruction.json.