logged monitored observed audited settled ←

We Settle
AI Decisions.

Decision settlement infrastructure for agentic AI.

No settlement, no finality, no accountability.

Get in Touch
0 patents pending
0 claims
0 papers (DOI)

Regulations define obligations.
None define completion.

Every major AI regulation requires documentation, oversight, and accountability. None of them say when responsibility for an AI decision is actually done.

EU AI Act
“Automatic event logging required.”
— Article 12, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689

Requires you to record. Doesn’t say when you’re done.

GDPR
“Demonstrate compliance at all times.”
— Article 5(2), Accountability Principle

Requires you to be accountable. Doesn’t define finality.

Caremark
“Board must exercise oversight.”
— In re Caremark (Del. Ch. 1996)

Requires you to be diligent. Doesn’t say when it’s settled.

This gap isn’t ethics. It’s missing settlement infrastructure.

Observing decisions is not the same as
closing responsibility.

Log
AI makes a decision
Score, ranking, recommendation, or denial
Event recorded
Rows accumulate — no completion condition
Audit finds gaps
No one defined “done” — every gap is attackable
Discovery: UNBOUNDED
Opposing counsel swims through your entire log ocean
· · · · · · → ∞
Answers “what happened” — never “is it done”
AI Decision Ledger
Each decision is a ledger entry
One decision, one entry
Every entry is OPEN or SETTLED
Binary — no scores, no partial credit
Settlement happens at a moment in time
Timestamped, irreversible, defensible
SETTLED
Account closed · Responsibility finality reached

Log is a surveillance camera. Ledger is a closing book.

This isn’t theoretical.
It’s already happening.

Hiring was first. The pattern generalizes to every frontier AI deployment.

SUED
AI Hiring
Secret scoring, no disclosure, no contestability
CLASS ACTION FILED — JAN 2026
AI Lending
Automated denial, applicant can’t see why
OPEN
AI Insurance
Risk scoring without process finality
OPEN
AI Healthcare
Triage ranking, no closure mechanism
OPEN
AI Housing
Tenant screening without accountability finality
OPEN
AI Content
Automated moderation, no reconstruction path
OPEN

Every domain where frontier AI makes high-consequence decisions faces the same structural gap: decisions open, responsibility never closes.

The Decision Settlement Layer

Without Settlement
AI decides
Log grows
Log grows
Audit finds gaps
Lawsuit filed
Discovery UNBOUNDED
→ ∞
With Δ1
AI decides
Δ1 = SETTLED
Account closed.
Dispute? Bounded to settlement conditions.

The difference isn’t better AI.
It’s whether the account is open or closed.

Per-Decision

Settlement Chain

Every step sealed with SHA-256 into a settlement chain. Tamper one record, break finality.

Intent Isolation

Non-Reconstructable

Strategic intent is recorded as consumed, never exposed in the settlement record.

Settlement

Δ1 Validity Gate

Binary pass/fail. All conditions must hold, or the session stays open.

Deployment

Any Agent, Any Stack

Works with MCP, tool use, A2A. Pluggable TSA. No source code access required.

This is what Decision Settlement looks like.

Every agent decision either reaches Δ1 finality — or stays explicitly unsettled.

settlement-viewer
SETTLEMENT RECEIPT
────────────────────────────────────────────
Settlement ID ST-2026-0208-A7F3 Session sess_8f3a2b1c4d5e Agent procurement-agent-03 Timestamp 2026-02-08T14:23:07.442Z TSA RFC 3161 (pluggable)
Settlement Trace (12 steps, hash-chained)
#01 tool_call vendor_api.search(category="raw_materials") ✓
#02 inference  compare_quotes(n=4, criteria=[price, lead_time]) ✓
#03 tool_call compliance.check(vendor_id="V-8821") ✓
#04 tool_call approval.request(amount=42500, approver="cfo") ✓
... (8 more steps)
#12 action    purchase_order.submit(po="PO-2026-1847") ✓
Δ1 Settlement Check
✓ C1 Evidence Consumed 12/12 steps sealed
✓ C2 Intent Isolated non-reconstructable
✓ C3 Settlement Signed authorized by cfo@acme
Hash: sha256:9f86d0...a7f3e2
Δ1 = C1 ∧ C2 ∧ C3 SETTLED

Settled. Sealed. Adjudicable.

Settlement isn’t abstract.
It applies to physical actions.

When AI decisions result in real-world actions, responsibility becomes undeniable. Robot-In-Honey (RIH) demonstrates that even physical AI behavior can be enveloped, observed, and settled.

If physical AI actions can be settled, purely digital decisions should never be considered too complex to close.

Built on real results, not empty promises.

We don’t sell legal standing. We sell litigation readiness.

Research
4 Papers
  • Cognitive Leakage & AI Accountability
    Δ1 as binary condition for responsibility finality
  • Responsibility Completion for Agentic AI
    Why accountability must be engineered as a completion state
  • From Data Leakage to Intent Leakage
    Why scoring cannot produce responsibility closure
  • Intent Leakage by Design
    Protocol-level gaps preventing decision finality
Patents
9 Patents Pending
  • 196+ patent claims
  • Full settlement stack
  • Priority dates locked
  • Estimated design-around: 2–3 years
Standards
3 Frameworks
  • Architecture addresses all OWASP Agentic AI Top 10 risk categories
  • EU AI Act Article 12 aligned
  • NIST AI RMF mapped

All research peer-citable via Zenodo DOI. View publications →

Regulations define obligations.
We define done.

We’re happy to walk through the settlement architecture, the patent stack, and how Δ1 finality works.

Get in Touch

one@oia-lab.com