Inputs
- Published intent version and obligations from Chinje
- Authority and policy context
- Compiler target capabilities from λ-Safe
Governance and formal assurance
Intent-to-Control Bridge
Translate intent into enforceable requirements.
Translation of declared intent and obligations into machine-enforceable contract fragments and compiler inputs.
Responsibility
What Intent-to-Control Bridge is responsible for
The Intent-to-Control Bridge resolves a published intent against authority and compilation inputs, then produces a translation package and target fragments that λ-Safe can compile. It preserves the declared scope and refuses when the intent cannot be represented faithfully.
Intent is written for people and policy; a compiler needs contract fragments. The Bridge is the controlled translation step in between, and it is where silent semantic loss would otherwise happen. The translation package records what was resolved, what was mapped and what was refused.
It is also a dependency boundary: the Bridge must resolve authority and compiler inputs before λ-Safe can compile anything. When the window-preservation case cannot be represented faithfully, the design position is refusal rather than an approximate translation.
Lifecycle position
Where it sits in the governance lifecycle
Stage numbering is canonical across the site. Open the interactive lifecycle to see every component with responsibilities at each stage.
Intent
Declare the objective, obligations and scope.
Contract formalization
Translate intent into machine-enforceable requirements.
Verified capabilities
What is verified today
Capabilities are drawn from the product register. Each one is bounded by the limitations stated further down this page.
- Intent resolution against authority and compiler inputs
- Translation package generation for a published intent version
- Target-fragment emission for supported compiler constructs
- Explicit refusal when a required case cannot be represented
Outputs
- Bridge translation package
- Target fragments for compilation
- Refusal record identifying the untranslatable requirement
Evidence and maturity
What the evidence supports
Maturity describes verified engineering evidence in a bounded environment. It is not a production-readiness statement.
Maturity note
Adapters and translation packages were implemented and exercised in the local adapter chain (READY_FOR_COMPILATION, then compiled and verified). The Bridge is a CLI component rather than an HTTP service, and the D1 window-preservation case is currently a refusal path only.
Not production-qualified
This label describes verified engineering evidence only. No production deployment, certification, benchmark or customer outcome is claimed.
Evidence recorded
- Bridge translation package and target-fragment adapters implemented and tested.
- Local chain reached READY_FOR_COMPILATION before compilation and verification.
- Handover record: Bridge is a build artifact (CLI) with D1 refusal implemented.
Dependencies
- Chinje
- λ-Safe
Dependencies are stated as the product register records them. A dependency is not automatically production-qualified; see its own product or component page for its maturity and limitations.
Limitations
What this product does not do (yet).
Limitations are stated before the evaluation questions so they cannot be missed, downplayed or treated as future-work footnotes.
Limitations — read before evaluating
- Implemented as a CLI component: there is no console-facing HTTP service contract for it.
- The D1 window-preservation case is preserved as a refusal path; the full correction remains open.
- Translation coverage is bounded by the compiler targets λ-Safe supports.
No capability on this page should be read as production qualification. If a limitation is material to your use case, it belongs in the evaluation scope — not after it.
Relationship to the platform
How it fits
The Bridge is deliberately narrow: it neither authorises nor executes. It exists so that the authority decision can be made against a faithful, inspectable translation rather than against raw natural-language intent.
Evaluation questions
- Which intent constructs can be represented faithfully today?
- What is recorded when translation refuses a requirement?
- Can a reviewer trace each compiled fragment back to the originating obligation?
Next step
Evaluate Intent-to-Control Bridge against a real control problem.
Bring a system boundary, an action class and a failure mode. The first step is to agree what should be governed and what evidence would count.