Antefacts

Note · 10 September 2026

The licence programme, and the first instrument built on the protocol.

Two things are now on this site that were not before: what we sell, and what we have to declare about ourselves. This note explains both.

What we sell

A licence, and a service

Until now this site described a method and said who it was for. It now says what is on offer. Certification bodies license the method and the platform, run evaluations with their own assessors, and issue their own opinions on evidence that carries both names. Procurement teams commission a fixed-price evaluation of the candidate systems they are choosing between, on criteria they author and we seal.

Neither changes the method. Both are the method applied to a decision someone has to defend.

The first instrument

Invigil runs on the protocol

A method that has never been run is a document. The protocol now has a production domain: Invigil, which measures the formal reasoning of frontier AI models on Lean 4 problems they have never seen, runs each quarterly holdout under the Antefacts method. The problem set and scoring are pre-registered and hash-committed, the harness is published, the record is chained, and each run carries a certificate that it was conducted as registered. A laboratory buying an Invigil measurement receives a number certified by someone other than Invigil.

Formal mathematics is the hardest case for the method and the cleanest: a proof checks or it does not, so the subject-performance claim is as tight as it will ever get. It is the right first domain for that reason.

What we disclose

Invigil and Antefacts share an owner

They are separate companies with separate infrastructure, data and customers, under one parent. Our own neutrality rules require every subject's relationship to us to be published on the pre-registration, so the relationship between the two companies is published first, on the new licensees and disclosures page, together with the rules that follow from it. The one that matters most: where the subject of an Antefacts evaluation is itself an Invigil customer, that evaluation produces a methodology and no score. We would rather forgo the evaluation than seal a record that a losing party could later say was compromised.

Saying this up front is not a formality. A notifying authority that learns of a relationship from us has a disclosure. One that learns of it from a provider's lawyer has a finding.