Lab brief L-03Gov-tech · AI governanceStatus — Research

SentinelFlow.

Provable AI compliance for government: every decision traceable, signed, and regulator-ready in real time.

Role — Architect & builderStack — Trustworthy RAG · MCP · evidence graphStage — Research
§ 01The idea

Proof, not promises.

Public agencies are under pressure to adopt AI responsibly while preserving transparency, accountability, and auditability. Existing systems deliver reports, not proofs: a snapshot every six to twelve months, assembled by hand, already out of date when it lands.

SentinelFlow™ turns compliance from an after-the-fact documentation task into a continuous, evidence-by-construction framework. Every AI decision is provable, traceable, and regulator-ready the moment it happens, not reconstructed weeks later for an audit.

It is not another compliance dashboard. It's a governance engine for the AI age.

§ 02The challenge

Where today's oversight breaks.

Current reality
Impact
Compliance snapshots every 6–12 months
Posture drift and undetected risk accumulation
AI systems act without verifiable provenance
Audit gaps and regulatory exposure
Manual evidence assembly
Weeks of staff time per audit cycle
Alert fatigue from generic dashboards
Oversight paralysis and missed incidents
§ 03The solution

Three planes and an honest interface.

Trustworthy RAG

Data plane

Retrieves only from approved, versioned sources, with real-time scoring for retrieval adequacy and faithfulness.

MCP-governed orchestration

Control plane

Enforces least privilege, route transparency, and signed execution logs across every agent action.

Causal Evidence Graph

Evidence plane

A hash-chained, cryptographically signed graph (CEGO) linking prompts, evidence, policies, and human approvals.

Attention-aware UI

Interface

A minimal "Evidence Stack" surfaces only high-value, risk-weighted actions, with one-click "Prove It" expansion.

§ 04Mission alignment

Built to the directives, not around them.

NIST AI RMF 1.0 ISO/IEC 42001 U.S. Executive Order on Trustworthy AI EU AI Act readiness Continuous monitoring Runtime verification Decision traceability Data residency & non-repudiation
§ 05Pilot benchmarks

Quantified impact.

−50%
Time to audit-ready
justification
+25%
Alert
precision
30–50%
Safe auto-
remediation rate
≥4.5/5
Reviewer confidence in
evidence sufficiency

Targets drawn from pilot benchmarks, measured against agencies' current snapshot-based baselines.

§ 06What I'm testing
Open questions

SentinelFlow™ is in pilot. The questions in front of me: whether a cryptographically signed evidence graph stays performant at agency scale; how much auto-remediation a reviewer will actually trust; whether an attention-aware interface genuinely cuts oversight fatigue rather than hiding risk; and how cleanly "evidence by construction" maps onto each regulator's expectations.

If you work in or with the public sector on AI assurance, I'd value a conversation about where this holds and where it doesn't.

Real-time assurance, instead of post-hoc audits.

An exploratory pilot by Dr. Nabeel A. Khan. Figures are pilot targets, not guarantees.

Fin · Sheet 09