Forensic CPM Engine: Reproducibility Certificate

One-page expert-disclosure attachment. The engine that produced your forensic report is independently reproducible by any opposing expert.

VERSION 2.9.16 · SHA-256-LOCKED · SIGSTORE-SIGNED

Engine Identity

JavaScript engine SHA-256

4815ba956d733ea4c008da4337bf2fa36c7d9ef3630a027475e28a4d2bea5e0d

Python reference SHA-256

1537dfd490062bfe1b726f86cabf4731d8a2218b6013732c8a53256a2bcb7e7c

GitHub commit (tag v2.9.16)

6aef619f6e2866428905243e0fc87db533a55819

Topology-hash format

sha256-canonical-v2 (prefix v2:)

Four Public Deployment Surfaces: Bit-Identical

Surface	Install Path	Verification
npm package	npm install cpp-cpm-engine@2.9.16	npm view cpp-cpm-engine@2.9.16 dist.shasum
GitHub release	github.com/danafitkowski/cpp-cpm-engine/releases/tag/v2.9.16	gh attestation verify cpp-cpm-engine-2.9.16.tgz
Railway-hosted MCP	curl mcp.criticalpathpartners.ca/cpm-engine.js	sha256sum: compare to cell above
MCP registry index	registry.modelcontextprotocol.io/v0/servers?search=cpp-cpm	version === 2.9.16 (later builds have since shipped)

Reproduction in under a minute, zero npm dependencies, any opposing expert

git clone https://github.com/danafitkowski/cpp-cpm-engine
cd cpp-cpm-engine && git checkout v2.9.16
npm test                # 878 unit tests
node cpm-engine.crossval.js   # 43 fixtures × 444 checks JS↔Python parity

Verifiable Evidence

Unit tests passing

878 / 878 assertions

Cross-validation

43 fixtures · 444 / 444 checks

CI matrix

3 OS × 3 Node = 9 cells per push

Engine lines of code

JS 6,950 · Python 1,304

Holiday calendars

66 jurisdictions (CA+13, US+50, +UK)

Sigstore signature

Rekor public transparency log

AACE-Canonical Method Identifiers

AACE 29R-03: Forensic Schedule Analysis. MIP 3.3 Observational/Dynamic/Contemporaneous As-Is (Windows); MIP 3.6 Modeled/Additive/Single Base (Impacted As-Planned); MIP 3.7 Modeled/Additive/Multiple Base (TIA); MIP 3.8 Modeled/Subtractive/Single Simulation (Collapsed As-Built).
AACE 49R-06: Critical Path identification methods (LPM · TFM · MFP).
AACE 52R-06: Time Impact Analysis (fragnet insertion).
DCMA 14-Point Assessment: full coverage in CI.
SCL Delay & Disruption Protocol, 2nd Edition (2017): methodology alignment.

Daubert Framework Compliance

Daubert and Federal Rule of Evidence 702 are the United States federal framework. They do not govern admissibility in a Canadian court, where the test is R v Mohan as restated in White Burgess. The certificate is built on the Daubert prongs because they name the reliability questions explicitly; the same questions are weighed at the Canadian gatekeeping stage. See the independent-verification article for how the two frameworks line up.

These are the frameworks this certificate is built to support. Listing one here is not a certification of compliance with it.

FRE 702 as amended December 1, 2023 requires methodology reliability (Rule 702(c) and 702(d)) to be demonstrated to a preponderance of the evidence. All four Daubert prongs addressed in buildDaubertDisclosure().
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993): foundational reliability framework: testability, peer review, error rate, general acceptance.
FRCP 26(a)(2)(B), the written report that must accompany the disclosure for a retained expert, or for an employee whose duties regularly involve giving expert testimony. The report is prepared and signed by the witness and states the basis and reasons for each opinion and the facts or data considered. Engine version, topology hash, and manifest fields are offered as a supporting exhibit to that report. They do not by themselves discharge the rule.
Proposed FRE 707: would apply Rule 702(a)–(d) reliability standards to machine-generated evidence offered without an expert witness. That is squarely what this engine produces, so its output must be able to show sufficient input data, reliable principles and methods, and reliable application to the facts. This certificate exists to make that showable. Status: proposal only. As of 2 October 2026 it is not on the US Courts schedule of amendments set to take effect, and the Advisory Committee on Evidence Rules reported in September 2026 that it is still considering the proposal (report, page 26). Pending amendments status. Not to be confused with FRE 706, which governs court-appointed experts.