✓HIGH CONFIDENCE

Subscription license to NorthStar Platform are distinct from the subscription license

Both prongs of the distinct test were applied.

Reasoning trace⬢ claude-opus-4-7 ⌥ prompt distinctness-saas-v1.4 ◆ self-consistency 0.97 · click ↓● RAG · 2 chunks · click ↓

Chain of thought

The subscription is a series of distinct services with the same pattern of transfer (monthly access). Per ASC 606-10-25-15 it is treated as a single PO. Recognized ratably over 36 months.

Retrieved authority · 2 chunks · cosine ≥ 0.83 · post-checked against verified-registry

CODIFICATION · ASC 606-10-25-27

An entity transfers control of a good or service over time and, therefore, satisfies a performance obligation and recognizes revenue over time, if one of the following criteria is met: (a) The customer simultaneously receives and consumes the benefits provided by the entity's performance as the entity performs.

CODIFICATION · ASC 606-10-25-15

A series of distinct goods or services has the same pattern of transfer to the customer if both of the following criteria are met: (a) Each distinct good or service in the series… would be a performance obligation satisfied over time… (b) The same method would be used to measure the entity's progress…

Structured output

PerformanceObligation{
  po_id:               "po-1-subscription",
  distinct_capable:    true,
  distinct_in_context: true,
  overall_distinct:    true,
  authority_cited:     ["606-10-25-27", "606-10-25-15"],
  confidence:          "high",
  consistency_score:   0.97,  // 5 samples
  requires_human_review: false,
  model:               "claude-opus-4-7",
  prompt_v:            "distinctness-saas-v1.4",
  judgment_id:         "018f2a4b7c80e1faa910d4c3de0f5b76"
}

◆ MethodologyHow we arrived at confidence = high✓CISC 0.97

We use Confidence-Informed Self-Consistency (CISC, arxiv 2502.06233): the same prompt is sampled 5 times at temperature 0.3; each sample produces an independent judgment. We then measure two agreement metrics — direction agreement (does every sample reach the same conclusion?) and reasoning agreement (do they reach it for the same reason?). The weighted vote becomes the score.

The 5 sampled judgments

#	Direction	Factor (a) · capable of being distinct	Factor (b) · separately identifiable reasoning	Cluster
1	distinct = true	✓ standalone benefit	separately priced & sold	✓DOMINANT
2	distinct = true	✓ standalone benefit	separately priced & sold	✓DOMINANT
3	distinct = true	✓ standalone benefit	separately priced & sold	✓DOMINANT
4	distinct = true	✓ standalone benefit	separately priced & sold	✓DOMINANT
5	distinct = true	✓ standalone benefit	separately priced & sold	✓DOMINANT

CISC weighted score · how 0.97 was computed

direction_agreement = 5/5 = 1.00

reasoning_agreement = 5/5 (all cite same reasoning) = 1.00

cisc_score = 0.6 × direction + 0.4 × reasoning

= 0.6 × 1.00 + 0.4 × 1.00 = 1.00

Confidence tier mapping

✓HIGH ≥ 0.95

auto-applied

◐MEDIUM 0.80 – 0.95

human review suggested

⚠LOW < 0.80

hard-blocked · human required

Bottom line: the AI is unanimous that PO-1 is distinct (100% direction agreement). Where it splits is why — all 5 samples cite the same reasoning, hence high confidence.

Modernized investor framework Q1 — judgment-laden recognition areas. Where in this company's revenue policy is the recognition judgment most concentrated? For NorthStar, the answer is the PO-2 onboarding distinctness call. The investor analytical follow-up requires documenting the distinctness reasoning. Recommend confirming integration depth from the SOW before sign-off.Modernized investor framework · Q1 · ASC 606-10-25-19 / -25-21