Direction & framing
The objective, audience, constraints, and standard you established.
20 ptsProof of work for the AI era
Your cognitive signature,
attached to your work.
Turn an AI conversation and its finished result into shareable evidence of the thinking, decisions, and human effort behind what you created.
CognaturePublic proof · Preview
Cognitive signature
Launch strategy for a
local coffee brand
Human contribution visible across five signals74/100
Substantial contribution · high confidence
01
The process behind the result
02
The work tied to its evidence
03
One proof page you can share
Create your cognitive signature
Connect the process
to the work.
The conversation reveals how you thought. The finished work reveals what survived. Cognature connects the two into evidence other people can inspect.
- 1
Add the conversationUse a public ChatGPT or Claude shared link.
- 2
Add the finished workPaste the exact text that came from that process.
- 3
Create your proofReceive a cognitive signature with a score, evidence, and limitations.
Inside the signature
Five traces of human contribution.
A longer transcript is not better proof. Cognature looks for the moments where your input meaningfully shaped the submitted work.
Original context
The facts, experience, examples, or domain knowledge you contributed.
15 ptsJudgment & decisions
The alternatives you considered and the choices you made.
25 ptsIteration & correction
The critiques and revisions that materially changed the result.
25 ptsVerification & control
The checks you made before taking responsibility for the work.
15 ptsExample cognitive signature
The proof behind the work.
A public proof connects the finished result to the decisions that shaped it—without asking anyone to trust a score on its own.
74/ 100
Human contribution score
Substantial contribution
high confidenceThe transcript shows sustained human direction, several reasoned decisions, and meaningful revision of the final work. The strongest evidence appears in audience framing and the rejection of generic recommendations.
Direction & framing
17/20The objective, reader, tone, and commercial constraint were established early.
Original context
10/15The user added firsthand customer observations that shaped the argument.
Judgment & decisions
20/25Alternatives were compared and two suggestions were rejected with reasons.
Iteration & correction
17/25The structure and conclusion were substantially revised across the conversation.
Verification & final control
10/15The final text was checked for unsupported claims, though not all facts were sourced.
02
Evidence from the process
What the person contributed
01 · Audience constraint“This is for first-time founders, so remove the language that assumes a finance background.”
02 · Reasoned rejection“That recommendation sounds neat but conflicts with what our customer interviews actually showed.”
03 · Final synthesis“Keep the comparison, but use it to support the decision rather than making it the conclusion.”
What this proof does not claim
- The evaluation measures visible contribution, not time spent or legal authorship.
- External factual claims in the work were not independently verified.
Proof that travels with the work
Put the evidence wherever the result lives.
01GitHub project↗
02LinkedIn post↗
03Reddit post↗
04Article or blog↗
A deliberately narrow proof
Evidence of contribution—not a claim of authorship.
Cognature shows the human contribution visible in a submitted AI conversation and the work connected to it.
It can showDirection, context, judgment, iteration, and verification reflected in the result.
It cannot proveIdentity, hours worked, legal authorship, or whether every claim in the work is true.