006-F003: Human authority is a separate evidence object

Thesis

Approval, authority and stop conditions must be captured explicitly when recommendations can affect operations, cost, security or customer impact.

Classification

OBSERVATION; confidence MODERATE; source quality: The claim follows enterprise governance practice and public product boundaries; customer-specific validation remains required.

Evidence

• S006-01
• S006-02
• S006-03
• S006-04

Reasoning

Raven's public-safe relevance is preserving the human authority boundary above technical evidence.

Counterevidence

Public documentation may already include adjacent governance, replay, automation or audit capabilities. This assessment does not treat non-disclosure as absence.

Limitations

This assessment is limited to public documentation and public-safe Raven research artifacts. The absence of public documentation does not establish the absence of capability. Customer-specific validation requires a bounded read-only pilot or an approved architecture review.

Conclusion

This finding is suitable for public review only as an evidence-bounded research question for Assessment 006.

Relevance to Raven

Raven may be useful where the organization needs a replayable, human-approved decision object above existing platform evidence.