# What can be shown, not just said 8 things about PaveKeep can be demonstrated on a working network rather than described. Each one below names the artefact behind it — a screen of the running product, or a document it produced — and you can open the artefact. The documents are the real output, not illustrations of it: the three booklets are the files a council would file, and the two evidence packs are the same report generated as at two different dates. Every one is committed to the repository with its SHA-256, so the file you download is the file that was reviewed. ::section split ## P1 · Every number can be traced back which survey, which setting, which piece of arithmetic. The software explains itself rather than asking to be trusted. ![P1, shown on screen: method statement](/media/method-statement.webp) :: ::section split ## P2 · A sealed road, a sprayed-seal road and a gravel road are scored by different methods, because they fail in different ways ![P2, shown on screen: unsealed rating](/media/unsealed-rating.webp) :: ::section split ## P3 · A road nobody has surveyed is reported as unknown, never as zero and never quietly averaged away This is the one councils test us on. ![P3, shown on screen: booklet page](/media/booklet-page.webp) :: ::section split ## P4 · Heavy vehicle traffic changes how fast a road is expected to wear out, and the change is visible rather than buried in a model ![P4, shown on screen: method esal](/media/method-esal.webp) :: ::section gallery ## P5 · The network as it stood on any past date — what an auditor or a funding body asks for when they reopen a claim ![P5, shown on screen: as at 2026 03 01](/media/evidence-as-at-2026-03-01.webp) ![P5, shown on screen: as at 2026 08 26](/media/evidence-as-at-2026-08-26.webp) ![P5, shown on screen: evidence by road 2026 08 26](/media/evidence-by-road.webp) :: ::section gallery ## P6 · A chain from the survey, to the work done, to who paid for it, to the declaration it happened under ![P6, shown on screen: instrument register](/media/instrument-register.webp) ![P6, shown on screen: surveys under instrument](/media/surveys-under-instrument.webp) ![P6, shown on screen: work funders remainder](/media/work-funders-remainder.webp) :: ## P7 · It sits beside the systems a council already has rather than demanding they be replaced ::section gallery ## P8 · From a spreadsheet of roads to a defensible works programme, measured, without a consultant in between ![P8, shown on screen: import](/media/import.webp) ![P8, shown on screen: program](/media/works-programme.webp) :: ::section cards ## The artefacts, to open or download These are files, not pictures of files. Their hashes are published with the pack: see `docs/PROOF_EXECUTION_MAP.md` and the manifest beside it. ### [evidence-pack-as-at-2026-03-01.pdf](/media/evidence-pack-as-at-2026-03-01.pdf) 73 KB ### [evidence-pack-as-at-2026-08-26.pdf](/media/evidence-pack-as-at-2026-08-26.pdf) 87 KB ### [booklet-committee.pdf](/media/booklet-committee.pdf) 603 KB ### [booklet-executive.pdf](/media/booklet-executive.pdf) 249 KB ### [booklet-grant.pdf](/media/booklet-grant.pdf) 616 KB ### [exports-gis-sample.geojson](/media/exports-gis-sample.geojson) 37 KB :: ::section cta ## None of this is a customer reference Every artefact above was produced on the demonstration network. No council has put its own data through PaveKeep in service, so there is nothing here that a council said about us — only things the software did, which you can open. ::cta /see-it Watch it happen ::cta.ghost /what-it-cannot-do-yet What PaveKeep cannot do yet :: --- Source: https://pavekeep.com.au/proof · PaveKeep · derived content