# Public Claim Amendment 5: Runnable Institutional Demonstrator

## Status

This amendment records the V11 conversion of the qualified-entry architecture into a runnable, role-separated synthetic tabletop. It does not alter the July 26, 2026 concept-prior date or the V10 conditional-sufficiency boundary.

## Current defensible claim

Breakout Parity can be represented as an auditable institutional workflow that:

- preserves persistent threat lineage;
- separates evidence, inspection, technical findings, rollback, consequences, review, and gate authority;
- rejects actions attempted outside role authority;
- handles covered heterogeneous threats, decoys, disputed evidence, cure, restoration, and N-1 failure in retained synthetic scenarios;
- reveals a preexisting hidden holdout and returns the system to HOLD;
- holds at a certified saturation boundary rather than optimizing individual cases while the portfolio becomes unsafe;
- exports a canonical action and gate receipt.

## What V11 does not establish

V11 does not establish that current institutions possess the required legal authority, throughput, data access, sensing reliability, restoration credibility, or political support. Its timing, breach-risk, confidence, and capacity values are test variables rather than empirical estimates.

## Next falsification step

A real demonstrator should use synthetic or sanitized data and measure alert, analysis, access, laboratory, adjudication, response, rollback, cure, restoration, and N-1 timings across separate institutional participants. A failed exercise is an admissible result if it identifies the interface, owner, and missing authority or capacity.