IVRIS Tech AI Pricing Transparency Revalidation v1.1
Validation audit, 22 July 2026

# AI pricing transparency revalidation audit — v1.1

**Run date:** 2026-07-22  
**Status:** PASS  
**Panel:** 100 named purposively selected vendors; not a probability sample  
**Review:** AI-assisted evidence collection plus separate skeptical AI verification and deterministic local validation; no independent human review claimed

## Contract checks

- Main CSV: 100 rows × 59 columns; V001–V100 unique and ordered.
- Source log: 521 rows × 15 columns.
- C1–C4 repaired independently; 45 rows contain at least two different C1–C4 statuses.
- All 136 formerly confirmed C5–C8 cells received context-level rechecks.
- All 19 formerly calculable C10 rows received context-level re-adjudication.
- Other nonconfirmed C5–C8/C10 cells were preserved from the prior source-revalidation pass. This repair prioritized eliminating unsupported positives and did not perform an exhaustive false-negative search.
- Confirmed fields require a retrieved supporting passage on an official URL, a non-empty value/note, and an exact excerpt of no more than 20 words. A visible passage may support a positive field on a partially retrieved page; missing dynamic content cannot support a negative finding.
- Blocked, dynamic, login-gated, or partially retrievable pages do not become negative findings.
- No score, classification, band, ranking, category league table, or recommendation was produced.

## C1–C8 counts

| Criterion | Confirmed | Not found in retrieved sources | Unresolved access | Capability mismatch |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| C1 | 61 | 25 | 14 | 0 |
| C2 | 68 | 20 | 11 | 1 |
| C3 | 53 | 34 | 13 | 0 |
| C4 | 85 | 10 | 3 | 2 |
| C5 | 42 | 41 | 0 | 17 |
| C6 | 30 | 54 | 0 | 16 |
| C7 | 21 | 66 | 0 | 13 |
| C8 | 17 | 70 | 0 | 13 |

## Derived outcomes

- C9 minimum AI-access cost: {"unresolved": 16, "confirmed_not_calculable_from_retrieved_sources": 37, "confirmed_calculable": 47}
- C10 marginal AI-usage cost: {"confirmed_calculable": 14, "confirmed_not_calculable_from_retrieved_sources": 65, "unresolved": 21}
- Source coverage: {"partial": 84, "adequate": 16}
- Capability status: {"confirmed": 79, "renamed": 12, "ambiguous": 8, "discontinued": 1}

## Files

- Main data SHA-256: `97E193399ECC5AD11D32F9514E67DE8C221FCBA321ACC214C78A2B19CAE81073`
- Source log SHA-256: `0897BDBE53EBA611B4A3C77225058BC2AA406034C12982DDFCE03E945816C811`
- QA JSON SHA-256: `18712B229126C5148E4976ADF1B96CA97F4F22576F6EEADDF1F90AD0D8EB1B78`

## Interpretation boundary

The results describe what the revalidation could confirm from current public, unauthenticated, vendor-controlled sources for the frozen named capability and locale observed. They do not measure product quality, price fairness, private negotiated terms, total cost of ownership, or the entire B2B software market. A non-confirmed field is not proof that a vendor never discloses it elsewhere.