FRAMEWORK_EVAL_SIGNAL_V1.1 System-Level Standard

Signal Integrity Framework

Evaluating Behavioral Systems for Decision-Grade Use.

The Required Standard
Decision-grade behavioral systems must demonstrate architectural rigor across distinct dimensions:

The Dimensions of Evaluation

1 Signal Definition

  • Is there a real signal—or just interpretation?
  • What behavioral variables are being captured?
  • Are these signals observable and stable?
  • Is the system extracting signal, or organizing narrative?
Breakdown Condition The system cannot distinguish between described identity and measured behavior.

2 Signal Anchoring

  • Is the signal grounded in reality—or floating internally?
  • Is the model anchored to an external reference population?
  • Are outputs absolute (distribution-based) or relative?
  • Does the signal persist across cohorts?
Breakdown Condition Signal only exists inside the system that generated it.

3 Signal Stability

  • Does the system produce consistent outputs?
  • What is the test-retest variance?
  • How sensitive is the system to input noise?
  • Under what conditions does the signal drift?
Breakdown Condition Outputs shift more than the underlying behavior.

4 Signal Traceability

  • Can you follow the signal from input to output?
  • What is the transformation path?
  • Is the logic deterministic or interpretive?
  • Can outputs be derived from inputs?
Breakdown Condition Outputs require explanation because they cannot be derived.

5 Decision Coupling

  • Does the signal change what people actually do?
  • What decisions are directly informed by this system?
  • Where has it improved decision accuracy?
  • What is the cost of a false signal?
Breakdown Condition Insight exists, but decisions remain unchanged.

6 Operator Independence

  • Is this a system—or a performance?
  • How much depends on the operator?
  • Would two operators produce the same calibration?
  • Can the system run without its originator?
Breakdown Condition The “signal” is reconstructed by the person delivering it.

7 Boundary Discipline

  • Does the system respect its domain limits?
  • What is explicitly out of scope?
  • How does it differentiate from clinical frameworks?
  • Are claims proportional to measurement rigor?
Breakdown Condition The system expands to match the narrative, not the data.

8 Calibration Loop

  • Does the system improve—or reinforce itself?
  • How is feedback from outcomes integrated?
  • What triggers model recalibration?
  • Are errors tracked as signal failures?
Breakdown Condition The system explains away misses instead of learning.

9 Signal Residue Test

  • Remove the narrative—what remains?
  • What does the system reliably produce without interpretation?
  • Is there a residual standalone signal?
  • Or does meaning only emerge through explanation?
Breakdown Condition No independent signal exists—only interpretation layers.

10 Counterbalance Discipline

  • Does the system account for inherent cognitive blindspots?
  • Is there a built-in cross-validation against narrative bias?
  • Does the architecture provide a corrective perspective?
  • Can the system identify when a user is "performing" for the model?
Breakdown Condition The system acts as an "echo chamber," merely confirming the user's existing biases.