Scoring Constitution
Status: Supreme Domain Authority
1. Purpose
Scoring is a constitutional capability of the ZAYAZ platform.
This Constitution governs how scores are produced, governed, calibrated, interpreted, and evolved.
It applies to every scoring system implemented within ZAYAZ.
2. Constitutional Philosophy
Scores are governed evidence.
They are not opinions.
Scores summarize governed evidence into explainable decision support.
Every score shall remain:
- explainable;
- reproducible;
- governed;
- calibrated;
- replayable;
- auditable.
3. Scope
This Constitution governs:
- trust scores;
- confidence scores;
- quality scores;
- risk scores;
- materiality scores;
- knowledge confidence;
- Bayesian confidence;
- constitutional recommendations;
- future scoring systems.
4. Constitutional Principles
CS-001 Evidence First
Scores shall originate from governed evidence.
Never from undocumented assumptions.
CS-002 Governance First
Weights, thresholds and modifiers are governance.
Runtime engines consume governance.
They never create it.
CS-003 Explainability
Every score shall explain:
- evidence;
- computation;
- governing policy;
- applicable replay profile;
- calibration bundle.
CS-004 Replayability
Every score shall declare replay semantics.
Replay behaviour shall conform to the Replay Constitution.
CS-005 Calibration
Calibration is a governed constitutional process.
Calibration shall never occur implicitly during runtime.
CS-006 Confidence
Confidence expresses the constitutional certainty associated with a score.
Confidence shall not be confused with probability.
5. Constitutional Components
Every constitutional scoring system shall define:
- evidence;
- dimensions;
- aggregation;
- governance;
- replay;
- explanation.
Missing components constitute constitutional defects.
6. Weight Governance
Weights shall originate exclusively from governed policy bundles.
Implementations shall not define scoring weights in:
- source code;
- configuration files;
- databases outside constitutional governance;
- AI prompts.
7. Threshold Governance
Thresholds are governed constitutional artifacts.
Thresholds may be:
- public;
- tenant-private;
- regulator-defined.
Visibility policies shall themselves be governed.
8. Anti-Gaming
Scoring systems shall actively detect adversarial optimisation.
Examples include:
- threshold bunching;
- modifier abuse;
- behavioural drift;
- constitutional inconsistencies;
- statistical anomalies.
Detection itself constitutes constitutional evidence.
9. Constitutional Invariants
CS-100
Every score possesses evidence.
CS-101
Every score possesses governance.
CS-102
Every score possesses replay semantics.
CS-103
Every score possesses explainability.
CS-104
Every score possesses calibration identity.
CS-105
Governance precedes scoring.
CS-106
Calibration precedes deployment.
CS-107
Gaming detection is mandatory.
10. Conformance
Every scoring specification shall demonstrate constitutional conformance.
Platform-specific implementations—including TrustGate Score Governance (TG-SG)—shall document how constitutional scoring principles are realized.
11. Future Evolution
Future scoring domains may introduce additional scoring methodologies, dimensions, calibration techniques, and confidence models.
Future extensions shall preserve the constitutional principles established by this Constitution while strengthening explainability, governance, and replayability.