FAQ

The core problem is the risk of functional regression and non-compliance introduced by the probabilistic nature of autonomous AI and Large Language Models (LLMs) when they generate or modernize business-critical code. AI-transformed code must maintain strict behavioral equivalence, but the probabilistic outputs often lead to functional drift.

Traditional methods fail because:

• AI often validates itself, which amplifies risk.
• Traditional CI/CD and manual testing cannot validate autonomous AI decisions
• Observability detects functional regression and operational issues after deployment, making the response reactive.
• No independent authority exists to certify the functional outcome between AI output and production execution.

It is a new category of AI Control Infrastructure and a mission-critical layer in the AI stack. It functions as a third-party, deterministic conformity/decision authority that governs and validates AI outcomes before they reach production.

It is positioned as a mandatory checkpoint between the AI code output and production execution in this flow: AI → AI Production Gate Infrastructure → Production. It uses an Integrated Validation Engine to deterministically validate the AI-generated code/decision against compliance criteria, ensuring only approved code outputs reach production.

Key features include:

• Integrated Validation Engine: Runs mandatory, comprehensive functional and behavioral tests on AI-transformed code.
• Outcome-Aware Testing: Tests the functional behavior of the transformed code/output, not just its syntax.
• Legacy Conformity Check: Deterministically, verifies that AI-refactored code maintains the exact functional behavior of the original legacy application, verifies that AI-generated new code maintains the exact functional behavior of the original prompt specification.
• Production Gate: Blocks the deployment of any AI-transformed code or AI decision that fails the integrated validation tests.

Conformity Signals / Trust Signals: Produces deterministic, auditable evidence logs certifying the code transformation outcome met conformity criteria.

Unchecked AI code can lead to:

• Production outages and security breaches.
• Elevated maintenance cost and escalating technical debt.
• Regulatory non-compliance.
• Research indicates approximately ~25% of AI code suggestions contain factual or logical errors, and up to 45% of AI-generated code fails security checks.

A primary use case is Autonomous Code Modernization on IBM i (e.g., from RPG/COBOL to RPGLE Free or Java/Node.js, React etc…). The Production Gate guarantees the same functional behavior in the modernized code, which reduces the fear of regression and allows for continuous, scalable modernization.

It provides the structural control needed to comply with regulations like the EU AI Act by:

• Enforcing independent validation and authorization of AI decisions before execution.
• Enabling Risk Management (Art. 9) by assessing risk before execution.
• Enabling Transparency & Traceability (Art. 12) through auditable Trust Signals and deterministic logging.
• Enforcing the separation of duties by keeping validation and authorization separate from AI generation.

The key takeaway is: “AI-driven modernization is inevitable; functional regression is optional“. For autonomous AI, the principle is that “Autonomous AI is inevitable; uncontrolled AI is optional“. The solution allows organizations to govern, validate, and confidently scale AI without scaling the risk of non-conformity.