ValueFinality

Reconciles authorization, execution, ledgers, obligations, reversibility, recourse, and economic consequence.

System Directory

System specification

A defined responsibility—not an unrelated product claim.

Value movement is reported complete before economic reality agrees

Name: ValueFinality
Layer: Constitutional layer
Control problem: Value movement is reported complete before economic reality agrees
Role: Reconciles authorization, execution, ledgers, obligations, reversibility, recourse, and economic consequence.
Inputs: attributed intent · authority · policy · target state · evidence references
Outputs: decision lineage · bounded execution record · state reconciliation · Receipt or explicit OPEN state
Dependencies: shared Finality authority, execution, evidence, verification, and target-system boundaries
Finality primitives used: identity · authority · governed decision · execution · authoritative state · finality · certificate / counterproof · reopen
Current evidence level: E3 · seller-controlled source definition and reference evidence
Implemented: source contract, architecture mapping, and seller-controlled test surface
Remains external: participating-institution SCOPE, independent reproduction, target integration, legal/IP conclusions, and production acceptance
Institution diligence questions: Does it deny correctly? Does reality reconcile? Are contradictions durable? Can another party reproduce the result?
Related systems: TrustAnchor · MandateZero · ObligationZero

Flagship architecture

Control, state, invariants and threat boundary.

Source-defined mechanics reconciled to FRP 2 / FSK 1.

Control boundary: Reconciles economic consequence without pretending payment authorization equals settlement.
State: AUTHORIZED ≠ EXECUTED ≠ SETTLED ≠ IRREVOCABLE.
Invariants: Ledger, obligation, recourse and reversal state remain contract-defined.
Proof objects: Value-state predicates, reconciliation record, Counterproof and REOPEN lineage.
Primary threat: Premature completion, reversal, corrected posting or mismatched obligations.

Proof object

Every system resolves into evidence semantics.

The certificate or Counterproof makes system-specific action legible through one shared verification object.

Public product object · illustrative sample

Finality Receipt

A portable explanation of what was authorized, attempted, observed, reconciled, and reopened. Sample values are illustrative; no external transaction or attestation is represented.

E2 sample · locally verifiable

Action ID: act_demo_7f31
Authority reference: mandate_demo_v3
Decision lineage: policy_demo_12 → PERMIT
Execution acknowledgement: adapter_ack_demo
Authoritative state: RECONCILED
Evidence references: evidence_demo_01…04
Contradictions: none observed in sample
Obligations: retain · notify · reopen
Classification: ILLUSTRATIVE
Protocol version: outcome-finality.v2.0.0
Receipt hash: sha256: 9f2c…7a10
Reopen rule: new state or revoked authority
Supersession lineage: none in sample

authority linked policy linked state reconciled reopen rule present