Topics · Evidence gap
A public reviewer can see that a decision record was witnessed while sensitive material stays behind controlled disclosure paths and authorized openings.
Concrete scenario
A municipality uses a private case-management vendor for benefits determinations. A journalist requests proof that a specific automated eligibility check ran on a date. The city cannot dump the full case file, but it must show a recognized commitment that the check occurred and was anchored under public governance rules.
Problem
Civic and regulated workflows run in vendor systems that cannot simply dump everything into public view. Citizens still need proof that a decision happened and was witnessed without exposing every document or private field.
Mechanism
Receipts carry public recognition facts while sensitive payloads stay in permissioned disclosure paths. Batch-root anchoring on ZK-AI Chain provides governed on-log reference; PRS-style surfaces expose recognition state without leaking locators, tenant identifiers, or private retention metadata.
Verifiable outcome
Scope boundary
Public recognition proves governed witness of a signed commitment, not full transparency of every document, real-time civic dashboards, or legal sufficiency without applicable law and process design.