# Executive Summary for Auditors and Compliance

## What this system guarantees

This system is designed to make **audit questions answerable by inspection**, not reconstruction.

It ensures that:

- obligations are explicitly stated,
- responsibilities are identifiable,
- changes are controlled,
- and evidence is preserved in a tamper-evident manner.

## Key compliance properties

- **Explicit normativity**: Only formal requirements introduce obligations.
- **Tamper-evident requirements**: Normative content is hashed.
- **One-way refinement**: No circular authority or ambiguous inheritance.
- **Documented risk acceptance**: Trade-offs are recorded and owned.
- **Change impact visibility**: Changes trigger mandatory review.

## Comparison to formal systems

### GAMP-style documentation models

#### Similarities

- Lifecycle-based validation
- Risk-based thinking

#### Differences

- Live, self-consistent artifacts
- Structural guarantees over procedural compliance

### Requirements traceability matrices

#### Similarities

- Clear lineage from requirement to test

#### Differences

- Semantic traceability instead of tabular
- Continuous validation rather than periodic

### Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)

#### Similarities

- Formal structure
- Explicit relationships

#### Differences

- Text-first and human-readable
- No proprietary modeling tools required

## Bottom line for auditors

Audits become confirmation exercises rather than forensic investigations, supported by durable, inspectable evidence of control.
