Accounting Evidence EnginePrototypeprototype-0.1.0

Entity Linkage Auditor

Inspect how public-safe company records are normalized, scored, accepted, rejected, or left unresolved—without exposing licensed data or transmitting pasted input.

  1. AuthoritySourceVerbatim bounded excerpt or public identifier
  2. ComparatorDeterministic baselineVersioned rule IDs, terms, and exclusions
  3. InterpretationStructured model outputInactive in this prototype
  4. ControlReview and releaseStatus, errors, metrics, version
Client-side matching

Change the evidence and rerun

The demonstration uses public company identifiers and synthetic collision records. The browser executes a deterministic function over this fixed candidate set; it makes no request and writes nothing to local or session storage.

Raw or public-safe input

Entity fields

Browser-only guarantee: this page contains no fetch, form action, analytics event, cookie, localStorage, sessionStorage, or upload path for these fields.

Decision

Current result

accepted

Accepted Microsoft Corporation: the top candidate scored 100 with a 95-point margin and no blocking warning.

A deterministic 0–100 evidence score used to order candidates; it is not a probability and is not calibrated.

5 candidates generated from the fixed public-safe set.

Namemicrosoft
Domainmicrosoft.com
GeographyUS-WA
TickerMSFT
CIK0000789019
Year2025
Generated entity candidates and deterministic score components
RankCandidateDispositionNormalized nameTotalNameDomainGeoTickerCIKTimeWarnings
1Microsoft Corporation
public-msft
Acceptedmicrosoft1002520820355None
2Acme Holdings LLC
synthetic-acme-holdings
Rejectedacme holdings5000005Common-name collision
3Acme Labs, Inc.
synthetic-acme-labs
Rejectedacme labs5000005Common-name collision
4Alphabet Inc.
public-googl
Rejectedalphabet5000005None
5Enphase Energy, Inc.
public-enph
Rejectedenphase energy5000005None
#1 Microsoft Corporation — accepted at score 100

Evidence: Exact normalized name or alias agreement; Public domain agreement; Geography agreement; Ticker agreement; CIK agreement; Entity active in observation year

Warnings: None.

Public identifiers: MSFT · 0000789019 · microsoft.com · US-WA

#2 Acme Holdings LLC — rejected at score 5

Evidence: Entity active in observation year

Warnings: Common-name collision

Public identifiers: no ticker · no CIK · acme.example · US-NY

#3 Acme Labs, Inc. — rejected at score 5

Evidence: Entity active in observation year

Warnings: Common-name collision

Public identifiers: no ticker · no CIK · labs.acme.example · US-CA

#4 Alphabet Inc. — rejected at score 5

Evidence: Entity active in observation year

Warnings: None.

Public identifiers: GOOGL · 0001652044 · abc.xyz · US-CA

#5 Enphase Energy, Inc. — rejected at score 5

Evidence: Entity active in observation year

Warnings: None.

Public identifiers: ENPH · 0001463101 · enphase.com · US-CA

Frozen demonstration benchmark

Known decisions, including safe non-matches

Five cases test exact identifiers, aliases, parent/subsidiary risk, and common-name ambiguity. This is a functional regression benchmark, not a production estimate of matching quality.

CaseAmbiguity classExpectedActualExpected entityResult
Exact public identifiersexact-identifiersacceptedacceptedpublic-msftPass
Alias with parent identifiersaliasacceptedacceptedpublic-googlPass
Historical name variationaliasacceptedacceptedpublic-wmtPass
Potential foreign subsidiaryparent-subsidiaryreviewreviewnonePass
Common-name collisioncommon-nameunresolvedunresolvednonePass
Decision logic

Acceptance requires evidence and margin

Candidate scores combine normalized-name agreement, public domain, geography, ticker, CIK, and temporal consistency. A decisive top score can still be blocked by an identifier conflict, common-name collision, parent/subsidiary warning, or inactive period.

Accepted

A top candidate must score at least 70, lead the next alternative by at least 15 points, and have no blocking warning.

Review or unresolved

Ambiguous relationship evidence is routed to review; weak or common-name evidence remains unresolved. The system does not force a match.

Scope boundary

Evidence inspection, not automated judgment

This prototype does not provide investment recommendations, assurance opinions, causal conclusions, unrestricted prompting, arbitrary URL retrieval, confidential uploads, or user accounts. Missing extracted evidence does not establish that a disclosure is absent.