Defense and aerospace

Model-native assurance for AI-generated code

Safety and vulnerability signals read directly from a model's activations, on the same host as generation. No exfiltration surface. No external guard model.

99.1% F1
Jailbreak & harmful-prompt detection
68.8% F1
Matches published SOTA on code vulnerability detection
<1ms
Probe overhead vs. 50–500ms generation time

No exfiltration surface

Nothing leaves the inference environment

Structurally harder to evade

Reads internal state an attacker confined to the input/output interface never sees

Complements V&V ↓

Details below

A measurable answer

An inline number your engineers can reason about, not a post-hoc review

Triage, not blanket review

Risk-scored diffs let reviewers and static analyzers focus effort where it's actually needed, instead of treating all AI-generated code equally.

Catches issues before the pipeline

The probe runs at generation time, before code is committed — fewer V&V cycles spent validating code that gets rewritten or rejected later.

A cheap pre-filter, not a shortcut

Static analysis and manual review still run in full — the probe only reorders what gets prioritized first, at near-zero added cost.

An added evidence artifact

Probe scores can be logged alongside existing verification records as a supplementary signal — this supplements your assurance case, it does not replace any part of it.

We haven't yet run this inside a live DO-178C-style or defense V&V pipeline — the above describes the intended integration points, not a measured cycle-time reduction.

See it on your own model

Talk to us about running a pilot on your stack — no retraining, no model swap-out required.

Talk to us