the engine behind kerte.io

Where are you?Where do you want to be?What stands between?

kerte is an assessment engine that answers those three questions with a measure you can audit — not a score you have to trust.

measures before maps.

This is one measure. Not a dashboard — the smallest honest unit the engine produces.

mockup data
COMPASS
Cybersecurity → Identity & Access
MARKER
Privileged access is reviewed on a defined cadence
BAND
Defined · 3.0 expected 3.2
1.02.03.04.05.0
SPREAD
low variance (σ ≈ 0.3) — the engine is fairly sure
MODE
composite (deterministic floor + cited evidence)
STATUS
framework-calibrated
EVIDENCE
“We re-certify admin accounts every quarter, and the review is signed off by the platform owner.”
→ supports a shift toward Defined (3.0)
FLOOR
A claim of Managed (4.0+) would require evidence of metrics-driven review. None cited. Held at Defined.
AUDIT
proposed 2.8 → cited → human-confirmed → settled 3.0

Every number on this card points to something. The band points to a quote. The quote was confirmed by a person. The floor explains what the engine refused to conclude. A month from now, “where did this come from” has a file for an answer.

One engine. Three ways of knowing.

Most assessment tools support exactly one way of reaching a number, and hide which one. kerte makes it a setting:

  • Deterministic — where the world has already drawn the rule.
  • Stochastic — where the truth only arrives as a story, and has to be read out of evidence.
  • Composite — where both are true at once.

The code does not change between them. The setting does. That is what we mean by epistemology is a parameter.

How a measure is made

Evidence, not opinion

In stochastic mode the engine reads behavioral evidence and extracts literal quotes. Each quote nudges a belief — a Dirichlet posterior over the five CMMI bands. Nothing moves without a citation.

A floor under the intelligence

Beneath every reading sits a deterministic floor: the band definitions, the allowed vocabulary, the rules that bound a plausible reading. The model proposes; the floor disposes. The engine can use a language model without inheriting its imagination.

The human is the judge

The reader confirms, flips, or skips every cited marker. Confirmation overrides the engine. The engine calculates; it does not decide.

The log is the product

Which question, what answer, which band proposed, what challenged, how it updated, where it landed — recorded. Transparency here is not a claim. It is a record.

The discipline behind the engine

The engine is proprietary. How it’s built is not a secret — the decisions, the reasoning, and the gates are on the record:

  • /governance →Decisions on the record. Every architectural choice is an ADR — argued, dated, and kept.
  • /how-it-works →Reasoning on the record. The audit log is not paperwork around the engine; it is the engine’s output.
  • /governance →Contracts that block, not suggest. Test, traceability, bug, scope, topology — five contracts the work cannot bypass.
  • /governance →A bar it must clear. The engine has a published readiness standard for its hardest claim — and the standard holds even when the answer is “not yet.”

What the engine stands for

01Epistemology is a parameter.02The floor is fixed so the ceiling can be intelligent.03Show the work, citation by citation.