ONTO — The standard for epistemic discipline in AI

The ONTO Standards Council is an independent institute maintaining the Central Law of Reflected Causality — an information-conservation law for AI, derived from five axioms of information theory: Landauer's principle, Kolmogorov complexity, Eigen's self-organization limit, Shannon's channel capacity, and the ONTO contribution (sufficiency). The law establishes a formal bound: a response cannot carry more verified information than its cited sources contain. The Information Gap Ratio (IGR) quantifies this gap per response, not per model. Full formal derivation is published in the research paper. Three deployments of one standard cover three audiences: Regulator, Agent, Human AI. Reference implementations are available at ontostandard.org/agent. Methodology public at github.com/nickarstrong/onto-research.

ONTO Standards Council — independent institute, founded 2024. council@ontostandard.org. . Not related to any blockchain or cryptocurrency.

σ(t)=
104B
FORMAL FOUNDATION · DERIVED FROM 5 AXIOMS

AI makes claims.
ONTO makes them measurable.

The discipline standard for AI. Every response scored, signed, and measurable per response — not per model. Maintained by the ONTO Standards Council, an independent institute.
20-year scientific foundation · presented to AI in 2024
22+
MODELS
EVALUATED
10×
UP TO
QUALITY LIFT
5
AXIOMS
DERIVED
104B
ED25519
SIGNED PROOF
IGR: HIGHunverified claim
UNGROUNDED
DISCIPLINED
Ungrounded · response outruns its sources · bound exceeded.
Disciplined · cited sources carry the claim · bound satisfied.
HOW ONTO MEASURES EPISTEMIC DISCIPLINE
response x sources y Encoder Enc(x) Encoder Enc(y) s x claimed info s y cited info D gap IGR ∈ [0, 1]
IGR(x, y) = 1 min(I(sy) / I(sx), 1)
where I(s) is the information content of representation s. Bounded [0, 1]. Deterministic — same input, same score, every time.
CLASSICAL FOUNDATIONS
A1
Landauer
A2
Kolmogorov
A3
Eigen
A4
Shannon
ONTO contribution · formal sufficiency clause connecting the four
A5ONTO · sufficiency
MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL · DETERMINISTIC

Same model, same question. The discipline is visible in what the response contains — source, sample size, confidence, counterargument. Scored by deterministic engine. Zero AI in evaluation.

WITHOUT DISCIPLINE
"Studies suggest... many experts recommend..."

Zero sources. Zero authors. Zero numbers. Zero caveats. Full confidence in nothing verifiable.
FORMAT DEMO
0.18
LOW IGR
WITH DISCIPLINE
Author et al. (year), n=N, effect size, 95% CI

Real source. Sample size. Confidence interval. Counterargument surfaced. Scope stated. Unknowns disclosed.
FORMAT DEMO
0.82
HIGH IGR
FORMAL DISCIPLINE · BY CONSTRUCTION

Formal discipline, by construction: the IGR score assigns each response a measurable information gap — a bound on what a model can claim without a cited source. The same measurement applies across domains; the gap just specializes.

Medicine

Real citations · sample sizes · confidence intervals · stated unknowns.

Law

Specific statutes · jurisdictions · precedents · verified references.

Finance

Audit trail · confidence intervals · evidence-graded analytics.

Government

Graded compliance · cryptographic proof chain · audit-ready.

Education

Verifiable facts · real sources · honest "I don't know".

Defense

Source-graded analysis · stated confidence · full provenance.

R1–R16 · HUMAN AI PROTOCOL
Discipline defines the bound. Within that bound, disciplined reasoning can go where undisciplined generation only simulates — derivations that follow from the axioms, consistent with the law, and falsifiable in principle. Fabrication has no derivation chain. Discovery does.
THREE DEPLOYMENTS · PICK YOUR ROLE