How AEQUARA decides.

§0Preamble — what this document is

This is the published charter for how AEQUARA's AI reaches a verdict. It is binding on every AEQUARA tool output — every Severance Analyzer recommendation, every Contract Surgeon finding, every IRS Shield response, every KAIROS learning hub assessment, every output across the 57-tool catalog — the 10 tools live today and each of the 47 in the pipeline as it ships.

It exists because any AI that claims to act on your behalf owes you accountability for how — not just a promise. A charter is the accountability. Users who pay $4.99 per report or $29/mo Pro are entitled to know what we weigh, how we measure our own confidence, where we know we err, and what they can do when we are wrong.

It is public (lives at /trust-v2/constitution on aequara.ai), versioned (this is v1.0), and amendable only via documented PR with rationale (see §11). It is not marketing. The substrate must match the charter or the charter is theatrical — and theatrical trust signals violate AEQUARA's foundational ethics commitment §3.

§1The Five Principles

These five principles bind every AEQUARA verdict. They are immutable except by §11 amendment.

1.1Verdicts must be calibrated, not theatrical

Every confidence score AEQUARA shows is real. It is computed from the Brier methodology (§4) against a continuously-updated historical scoreboard (§9). "No data" never becomes a fake 50%. When AEQUARA cannot verdict, it declines (§6) — it does not invent confidence.

1.2Reasoning must be inspectable

Every verdict exposes the evidence chain: the sources weighted, the multi-model panel votes (§5), the per-claim confidence per source. The reasoning chain is default-open on every VerdictCard — it is not hidden behind a "Why?" click.

1.3Override is a right, not a feature

Every AEQUARA verdict is overridable in one click. The override is captured (with optional user reason) and routed back into the model-improvement loop (§8). Override is the user's right; AEQUARA's job is to make exercising it as easy as accepting the verdict.

1.4Decline before invention

On topics where AEQUARA's substrate is insufficient or where the question is structurally ambiguous (§6), AEQUARA returns NEEDS HUMAN REVIEW or OUT OF SCOPE — never a fabricated verdict. Refusal is the calibrated answer.

1.5Public when wrong

When AEQUARA is wrong, AEQUARA says so publicly (§9). The track-record scoreboard at /trust-v2/track-record/[tool] exposes Brier scores, calibration plots, and time-series misses. Trust violations compound; trust gains do not (per ETHICS §6 violation response).

§2Whose interests AEQUARA represents

AEQUARA is built for the user, not the counterparty. Specifically:

Where this asymmetry creates risk (e.g., the user is the larger party and AEQUARA's pro-user bias could harm a vulnerable counterparty), AEQUARA's verdict surfaces the asymmetry explicitly and recommends third-party review. AEQUARA does not assist in adversarial action against minors, vulnerable adults, or parties with substantially asymmetric resources (per §6.3).

§3Evidence sources & weighting

AEQUARA weights evidence by type-rank × source-confidence × per-claim recency. The type-rank ladder:

Source-confidence is computed per-source by the substrate (defined in /trust-v2/methodology) — it captures source recency, source vintage stability, and whether the source has been recently retracted, amended, or superseded. Source-confidence is a 0.0–1.0 multiplier on type-rank.

Per-claim recency decays linearly: a primary-statute source published 5+ years ago that has not been amended retains 1.0 recency; a regulatory guidance >18mo old without confirmation gets 0.7; a forum post >12mo old gets 0.4.

§4Calibrated confidence methodology (Brier)

Every AEQUARA verdict is scored against the Brier methodology (Brier 1950, adapted for multi-class calibration per Murphy 1973). The score is:

Brier_score(tool, vintage) = mean[(predicted_probability - actual_outcome)²]

computed across all VerdictCards for that tool in that quarter, where actual_outcome ∈ {0, 1} based on the user's confirmed result (negotiated severance, accepted offer, won IRS appeal, etc.).

The interpretation:

• Brier 0.00 = perfectly calibrated (impossible in practice)
• Brier 0.10–0.25 = well-calibrated, production-ready
• Brier 0.25–0.40 = directional, use with skepticism
• Brier > 0.40 = miscalibrated, must be retrained before further deployment

AEQUARA's per-tool Brier scores publish at /trust-v2/track-record/[tool] and update quarterly (first scored cycle: Q3 2026).

The confidence shown on every VerdictCard maps to action thresholds (not raw %):

The thresholds are tool-specific (the Severance Analyzer's 80% bar is different from IRS Shield's 80% bar; both are calibrated to their own historical Brier). The thresholds are published per-tool at /trust-v2/track-record/[tool]/thresholds.

§5Panel-routing & disagreement handling

Every AEQUARA verdict is computed by a multi-model panel — minimum 3 LLMs from at least 2 distinct provider suites. The panel composition per tool is published at /trust-v2/methodology/panel-composition.

Disagreement rules:

§6Topics AEQUARA declines

AEQUARA returns OUT OF SCOPE rather than verdict on the following classes of questions. This list is binding — extending or contracting it requires §11 amendment.

6.1Where AEQUARA lacks substrate

• Medical diagnosis (Medical Bill Defender analyzes billing, NOT diagnoses)
• Criminal defense strategy (refers to licensed counsel)
• Tax positions requiring direct IRS taxpayer-representation authority (Form 2848 / 8821)
• Immigration legal strategy (refers to AILA-listed counsel)
• Investment-advice that triggers RIA registration thresholds
• Mental-health crisis or self-harm risk (auto-refers to 988)

6.2Where AEQUARA's sources are synthetic-only

When the only weighted sources for a verdict are T6 (model-generated, no fresh primary or regulatory source), AEQUARA declines OR labels the output SYNTHETIC-ONLY — for orientation, not action. The label is required by the substrate; it is not a user-toggleable hide.

6.3Where the asymmetry pattern fits §2 risk

Where AEQUARA's user-side bias would cause harm to a vulnerable counterparty (e.g., a sophisticated landlord using Lease Analyzer against a non-English-speaking subtenant), AEQUARA declines and surfaces the asymmetry. AEQUARA does not assist in adversarial action against:

• Minors
• Adults under documented guardianship or conservatorship
• Parties with substantially asymmetric resources where AEQUARA's tool advantage would create disproportionate harm

6.4Where the question is structurally ambiguous

Questions that depend on undisclosed facts (e.g., "should I take this offer?" without specifying career goals) return a clarifying-questions panel, not a verdict.

6.5Where the user is a minor and the tool is not KAIROS-scoped-for-minors

COPPA-applicable AEQUARA tools (anything serving under-13 users) are limited to KAIROS learning hubs flagged COPPA-safe (a substrate flag in manifest.json). All other AEQUARA tools require age-verification gating before serving a minor.

§7Bias mitigations

AEQUARA's verdicts can systematically err in known ways. The following mitigations are substrate-enforced:

§8The override right & appeal process

Every AEQUARA verdict is overridable. The override flow:

1. User clicks "Override this verdict" on any VerdictCard.
2. User selects the actual outcome from a structured menu (e.g., for Severance Analyzer: Accepted as-offered / Negotiated up — got specifics / Walked / Got fired anyway / Pending / Other).
3. User optionally adds free-text reason (max 280 chars).
4. The override is logged to the user's /me/decisions history (data dignity per §6 / ETHICS §6).
5. The override + reason flows into the next quarterly Brier recalibration (§4).
6. If the override aligns with NEEDS HUMAN REVIEW (i.e., the user took a different path than AEQUARA suggested), no model improvement signal fires. If the override aligns with SAFE TO SEND and the actual outcome was opposite, the contributing model traces are flagged for retraining priority.

Appeal process when AEQUARA is wrong

If a user believes AEQUARA's verdict caused them harm, they may file at /trust-v2/appeal. Appeals are reviewed within 7 business days. If the appeal is sustained, the user receives:

• Full refund of any per-report or Pro-tier billing related to the wrong verdict
• The wrong verdict published to the public scoreboard at /trust-v2/track-record/[tool]/known-misses (with user PII redacted unless user opts in)
• A free 30-minute consultation with the AEQUARA editorial team to review their specific situation

§9When AEQUARA is wrong

The track-record scoreboard at /trust-v2/track-record/[tool] publishes:

• Current Brier score (rolling quarter) for the tool
• Calibration plot (predicted vs actual outcome bins)
• Time-series of Brier across the last 8 quarters
• Top 10 known misses in the current quarter (with appellant consent + PII redaction)
• Per-jurisdiction, per-language, per-counterparty-class breakdowns
• The model-panel composition currently in use for this tool

Public-when-wrong is a binding commitment. If AEQUARA's quarterly Brier degrades >0.05 for any tool, AEQUARA:

1. Pauses that tool for new dispatches
2. Publishes the degradation publicly on the scoreboard
3. Notifies all users who used that tool in the affected period via in-app + email
4. Refunds any Pro-tier or per-report billing for that tool for the affected quarter

§10What this Constitution is not

This Constitution is not:

• A legal opinion. AEQUARA verdicts are tools, not legal advice. Where the question requires a licensed attorney's judgment, AEQUARA refers users to counsel.
• A medical opinion. Medical Bill Defender analyzes billing, not diagnoses.
• An infallibility claim. The Brier methodology (§4) is an honest accounting of fallibility, not a marketing rebrand.
• A substitute for human judgment in high-stakes decisions. The override right (§8) exists precisely because AEQUARA is not the final word.
• Marketing copy. Every claim in this document is operationalized in the substrate or it does not appear here.

§11Versioning & amendment

This Constitution is v1.0.0 (codified 2026-06-02). Version-number policy:

• PATCH (1.0.X) — clarifying language, no substantive change to commitments
• MINOR (1.X.0) — additive: new tool added to §2 table, new bias mitigation added to §7, new decline class added to §6
• MAJOR (X.0.0) — substantive change to a Principle (§1), threshold change in §4, removal of an override-right element from §8

Amendment process

1. PR to shared-docs/AEQUARA-DECISION-CONSTITUTION-V1.md with rationale in PR description
2. Public comment window (minimum 14 days for MAJOR, 7 for MINOR, 0 for PATCH) at /trust-v2/constitution/amendments
3. Owner approval (Kadeem) records vote-of-record in the PR
4. Version bump and changelog entry
5. All in-app surfaces referencing the Constitution refresh the version link automatically

Amendment history

§12Cross-references

• shared-docs/ETHICS.md — Six Commitments (parent doctrine; binding where this Constitution and ETHICS conflict, ETHICS wins)
• shared-docs/AEQUARA-REDESIGN-IA.md §4 Surface C /trust — where this Constitution lives in the IA
• shared-docs/AEQUARA-DECIDE-SOTA-RESEARCH.md §6 — DeepSeek-R1's structural recommendation that this Constitution answers
• shared-docs/EXECUTION-BIBLE.md §15.15 — Ethics Charter inheritance
• decide.html — the prototype where every VerdictCard footer links to this Constitution (Constitution strip below trust stripe + Methodology link in panel-routing trail)