Assess whether the control plane actually controls production traffic (d42446)

SITUATION A committee that has not met since the last incident put output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output in front of post-deployment monitoring owner in a publisher needing provenance on generated copy. This AI Governance Layer / Audit and Vendor Terms decision is the control plane actually from output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output, and the live options are Policy or governance breach, Model defect, Dual failure.

DECISION Post-deployment monitoring owner in a publisher needing provenance on generated copy must choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact using output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output after a committee that has not met since the last incident.

HYPOTHESES TO TEST 1. A committee that has not met since the last incident is noise around an already-controlled Audit and Vendor Terms process in a publisher needing provenance on generated copy, given output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output. 2. A committee that has not met since the last incident is the event in output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output that forces Policy or governance breach for post-deployment monitoring owner under AI Governance Layer. 3. Output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output shows a one-file miss after a committee that has not met since the last incident, not a Audit and Vendor Terms program failure. 4. Output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output cannot decide the control plane actually yet after a committee that has not met since the last incident; hold is the only AI Governance Layer close a publisher needing provenance on generated copy can defend.

ANALYSIS REQUIRED 1. Map the control-plane score in output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output to the policy gate post-deployment monitoring owner can enforce. 2. Name the override that would let the control plane actually proceed without a silent bypass. 3. Test whether a committee that has not met since the last incident changed routing, logging, or human-in-the-loop on the live agent path. 4. For this AI Governance Layer Audit and Vendor Terms file, read output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output against a committee that has not met since the last incident and write the one fact that would move the control plane actually for post-deployment monitoring owner.

RECOMMENDATION Choose Policy or governance breach / Model defect / Dual failure / Hold for the missing fact on this AI Governance Layer / Audit and Vendor Terms packet (output-scoring rubric that never fails a high-risk output after a committee that has not met since the last incident). The follow-on Audit and Vendor Terms action is what post-deployment monitoring owner does next: implement the option, assign an owner, and log the missing fact.