SAFE-Matter™ Bounded Runtime Admissibility Proof Report: Constitutional Runtime Governance Validation

This report documents the first bounded-runtime validation exercises conducted against the SAFE-Matter™ constitutional admissibility architecture. The testing programme evaluated whether execution authority could remain constitutionally governed under constrained runtime conditions involving evidential degradation, telemetry loss, spoof attempts, dependency failure, contradictory evidence, override activity, fragmented operational truth, and dependency-chain instability. The report establishes that SAFE-Matter™ consistently demonstrated deterministic refusal, suspension, escalation, revocation, or containment whenever admissible evidence became stale, unverifiable, contradictory, spoofed, incomplete, or dependency-invalid. The constitutional execution boundary remained stable throughout the bounded-runtime testing programme. The validation exercises further demonstrated that SAFE-Matter™ continuously recomputed admissibility using present-state evidential sufficiency rather than inherited operational trust or historical approval status. The testing confirmed that operational capability alone was insufficient to preserve execution authority where legitimacy became constitutionally indeterminate. Additional testing validated dependency-chain admissibility governance, recovery re-entry governance, bounded override accountability, adversarial runtime behaviour, propagation containment, and UNKNOWN-state constitutional enforcement under fragmented operational conditions. The report concludes that SAFE-Matter™ did not collapse into assumption-based continuation under degraded or contradictory runtime conditions. Instead, operational permissibility remained continuously governed through deterministic evidential admissibility recomputation at the point of execution itself.