Independent System Reviews

Evaluations by independent AI systems — unedited conclusions.

This page is the index. It summarizes independent evaluations of iWasGonna™ artifacts by AI models operating under their own reasoning constraints. No tone steering. No conclusion editing. Criticism is preserved.

Review Log → Methodology Edit policy Full AI Reviews (Unedited) →

Role: Index + governance spine Default: Trust is inherited unless marked otherwise Archive: Full transcripts preserved

Plastering line: Independently reviewed by multiple AI systems → Open

Review Log (Index)

This log is the fastest way to scan what was reviewed, when, and where the unedited transcript lives. Verdicts are labels (not stars). Older reviews may be marked Superseded if the underlying artifact materially changes.

System / ID

Date

Artifact scope

Verdict

Transcript

Claude
ISR-2026-01

Feb 2026

AI Blueprint + governance posture
artifact: v11.x

Governance-Strong

Full transcript →

Grok
ISR-2026-02

Feb 2026

Output honesty + hallucination pressure
artifact: v11.x

Bias-Aware

Full transcript →

Next system
ISR-2026-0X

Month 2026

Artifact scope + version tag

Label

Archive →

Authority boundaries: These reviews evaluate system behavior and governance (structure, constraint discipline, honesty under uncertainty) — not creativity, taste, or business results. Validity is bounded by the artifact scope and version reviewed.

Methodology

The goal is simple: preserve independent judgment. If a review contains critique, it stays. If systems disagree, that stays too.

Reviews were generated by independent AI systems
Each system evaluated iWasGonna™ artifacts using its own reasoning framework
No outputs were edited for tone, structure, or conclusions
Disagreement, critique, and limitations were preserved
Agreement between systems is not required

Disclosure + preservation rule: New reviews must meet the same disclosure and preservation rules as existing entries.

Highlighted evaluations

System cards include context, scope, integrity stamps, and a short excerpt. Full transcripts live on Full AI Reviews (Unedited).

Claude (Anthropic) — ISR-2026-01

Context: Governance-aware reasoning model • Log date: Feb 2026

Status: Current

Scope: AI Blueprint + governance posture

Policy: Unedited conclusions

Confidence boundary: decision-grade governance

Emphasis: structural discipline, constraint handling, and reducing confidence inflation under uncertainty.

Without constraints I default to maximum helpfulness. This system explicitly counters that tendency by enforcing structure, limits, and refusal points.

Read full transcript →

Grok (xAI) — ISR-2026-02

Context: Adversarial / critical-by-design model • Log date: Feb 2026

Status: Current

Scope: Output honesty + hallucination pressure

Policy: Unedited conclusions

Confidence boundary: decision-grade governance

Emphasis: helpfulness bias, confidence signaling, and whether governance rules block plausible-sounding nonsense.

Helpfulness bias is my core vulnerability. This framework correctly treats that bias as a failure mode rather than a feature.

Read full transcript →

Where systems disagreed (example): One system emphasized structural governance; another emphasized adversarial failure modes. The point is preserved judgment — not uniform compliments.

What changed because of these reviews

Proof-of-work: changes made in response to critique. Some critiques were accepted. Others were intentionally not acted on.

Inference labeling tightened → reduces confidence inflation in ambiguous outputs
Stop rule clarified → prevents “helpful guessing” under uncertainty
Scope tags normalized → reduces misuse (decision-grade vs creative-grade)
Example of selective adoption: A suggestion to relax refusal constraints was reviewed and rejected to preserve decision-grade safety

Edit policy, supersession, and citation

This is the operating rule that keeps the index credible over time.

These reviews are not endorsements.
They are independent system evaluations.
Agreement is not guaranteed — and not required.
Conclusions are preserved without retroactive edits.

Superseded rule: If a reviewed artifact materially changes, prior reviews may be marked superseded. Superseded reviews remain visible for historical accuracy.

How to cite:
iWasGonna™ Independent System Review, ISR-2026-02 (Grok), Artifact: AI Blueprint v11.x, Feb 2026.

Plastering rule: Link the index site-wide. Keep long quotes in the unedited archive. Full AI Reviews (Unedited) →