Hive: Built for Lemonade

Maya: Claim Decision Queue 3 ACTIVE

What is this?

We built this demo page just for Lemonade. Every claim Maya decides, whether it's approved, sent to review, or denied, gets a cryptographic receipt signed with ML-DSA-65 (a post-quantum method) and anchored on Base. The receipt is proof that can't be changed later, showing exactly what the model decided, when it decided it, and what data it used. Not a log file. A signature.

SIGNING NOW

Auto Claim #LM-2026-048831

Tesla Model 3, rear collision, Brooklyn NY. Claimant: J. Harrington. Filed 14m ago via app.

PolicyLMND-AUTO-9921

Claim amount$4,200

Maya confidence94.2%

Modelmaya-claims-v4.1

MAYA DECISION → APPROVE · INSTANT PAY

Why does the receipt matter here?

Maya approved this in 1.3 seconds with no human involved. That's the edge Lemonade has. But if a regulator, plaintiff attorney, or state DOI asks "what did your model actually see and decide?", a log file is not the answer. A signed receipt is. The signature is tied to the model version, input hash, decision, timestamp, and payout amount. No one can tamper with it, and anyone can check it.

RECEIPT PENDING

Renters Claim #LM-2026-047104

Water damage, Chicago IL. Claimant: M. Oduya. Filed 41m ago via app.

PolicyLMND-RENT-4471

Claim amount$1,850

Maya confidence71.8%

Modelmaya-claims-v4.1

MAYA DECISION → HUMAN REVIEW TRIGGERED

QUEUED

Pet Claim #LM-2026-047891

Vet surgery, Portland OR. Claimant: S. Nakamura. Filed 2h ago.

PolicyLMND-PET-7821

Claim amount$3,100

Maya confidence88.6%

Modelmaya-claims-v4.1

MAYA DECISION → APPROVE · INSTANT PAY

Agent Action Log

--:--:--All 3 claims connected to Hive receipt layer

--:--:--Signing LM-2026-048831 · ML-DSA-65

--:--:--Anchoring receipt → Base Mainnet

Current State: No Receipt Layer receipts signed today: 0

Maya AI Engine

Claim Decision

decision made · no record kept

Payment System

Payment Released

$4,200 USDC · no signed proof

Audit Log

No Cryptographic Proof

manual record · disputable · no model hash

Maya AI Engine

Claim Decision

maya-claims-v4.1 · 94.2% confidence

Hive Receipt Layer

Intercept + Sign

ML-DSA-65 · SHA-3 · post-quantum

Input Capture

Decision Hash

SHA-3 · inputs + model state

Hive Signer

ML-DSA-65

Post-quantum · NIST FIPS 204

Signed Receipt

rc_48831_a3f9e1

Immutable · tamper-evident · verifiable

Base Mainnet

On-Chain Anchor

USDC settlement · block 127,441,982

Maya approves claim #LM-2026-048831. Payment releases. No cryptographic record of what the model decided.

Signed Receipt + Regulatory Audit Trail COURT-READY

What a regulator gets

When a state DOI subpoenas claim decision records, this receipt is the answer. Every field is locked in with cryptography: change a single byte and the signature fails. No ambiguity. No "that's what our system shows." Just proof.

Latest Signed Receipt

receipt_idrc_48831_a3f9e1 claim_idLM-2026-048831 policyLMND-AUTO-9921 agent_modelmaya-claims-v4.1 decisionAPPROVE · INSTANT_PAY confidence94.2% payout_usdc4200.00 input_hashsha3:7f4a…c291

signatureML-DSA-65 sig_bytes3293 bytes anchoredBase · USDC block127,441,982 tx_hash0x9f3b…d441 verify_msN/A timestampN/A

Regulatory Audit Trail

State DOI Disclosure Check CLEAR

The receipt confirms model version, decision rationale inputs, and confidence threshold with cryptography. It satisfies NY DFS Circular 1 and CA CDI AI disclosure requirements without exposing proprietary model weights.

proof: zk:proof:0xa3f8…e291 · 4.2ms

ML-DSA-65 Signature SIGNED

A post-quantum digital signature under NIST FIPS 204. It ties the model decision to a specific input state and survives quantum decryption, built to last through a 30-year audit horizon. If the model changed, the signature fails. That's provable.

sig: ML-DSA-65:0x7f4a…c8b2 · 1.1ms

Base Mainnet Anchor ANCHORED

Receipt hash written to Base (L2, Ethereum). Block timestamp and tx hash are permanent, public, third-party verified. No Lemonade server holds the only copy. The blockchain is the witness.

tx: 0x9f3b…d441 · block 127,441,982

USDC Settlement Lock CLEAR

The payout amount ($4,200 USDC) is locked into the receipt before settlement clears. The signed receipt and the payment happen as one event, so there's no gap between what the model decided and what was paid.

usdc: 4200.00 · Base · pre-authorized

Why Hive built this for Lemonade

You've built the best AI-first claims stack in insurance. Maya decides faster and more accurately than any human adjuster. That's the edge. But that edge comes with a liability gap, and regulators are starting to find it.

The problem: AI decisions are invisible

When Maya approves or denies a claim in 1.3 seconds, the decision happens inside a model. There's a log. There's maybe a database entry. But there's no proof: no unchangeable record of exactly what the model saw, what version it was, what it decided, and what it paid. A log file can be altered. A signature cannot.

The regulatory pressure is real and accelerating

NY DFS Circular 1, CA CDI AI governance rules, and the NAIC model bulletin on AI are all moving toward requiring explainability and auditability on automated claims. The question isn't if a regulator subpoenas your AI decision records. It's when. Right now, your answer is a log file. That won't hold.

What Hive adds, without changing anything Maya does

Hive wraps the inference layer. Before any payment clears, Hive captures the model's decision (inputs, output, confidence, model version), signs it with ML-DSA-65 (post-quantum, NIST FIPS 204), and anchors the receipt hash on Base. The receipt can't be changed. The signature is publicly verifiable. Maya doesn't change. The claims flow doesn't change. You just now have cryptographic proof of every decision.

Why post-quantum matters for insurance

Insurance decisions have a 30-year audit horizon. A claim denied in 2026 can be litigated in 2041. By then, RSA and ECDSA signatures are breakable with quantum compute. ML-DSA-65 is NIST-standardized post-quantum. The signature you write today holds up in a 2041 courtroom. This isn't just forward-thinking. It's the only defensible choice.

The USDC anchor: why Base, not a database

The receipt hash is written to Base (Ethereum L2). The block timestamp and tx hash are permanent, public, and held by no single party. No Lemonade server holds the only copy. The blockchain is the neutral witness. Settlement in USDC means the payout amount is locked to the receipt before it clears. The signed decision and the payment happen as one event.

new in the canon · runnable on this page

Set the condition before the window opens

Maya decision receipts show what the claims system decided on an individual file. These additions extend that record to a condition set before its measurement window and to book level concentration, are live on the production rail, and the runs below verify them.

parametric.trigger · Deployed in production

Check a condition that was set before measurement begins

For a parametric claims or performance program, the receipt checks one named condition against one Bonded Performance Attestation. It shows that the policy terms digest was committed at or before the governing budget was declared. It shows that the budget was declared before the measurement window opened. It recomputes the trigger state from the referenced attestation rather than taking it from the caller. That gives underwriting and claims teams a clear record of the condition, budget, and measurement window.

What it does not do. It does not create, price, underwrite, or interpret a policy, and it never receives the policy terms. It does not show that a claim is payable, authorize a payment, establish that the measurements or loss are correct, verify the measuring party, or decide what the parties' contract requires.

Open the Parametric Trigger Receipt page Canon entry Schema

POST /verify/parametric-trigger · case pass, a clean record

Nothing has run yet. Click Run it and the answer below comes back from the verifier, not from this page.

POST /verify/parametric-trigger · case nottriggered, the condition was not met

Nothing has run yet. Click Run it and the answer below comes back from the verifier, not from this page.

POST /verify/parametric-trigger · case fail, a forged record

Nothing has run yet. Click Run it and the answer below comes back from the verifier, not from this page.

portfolio.exposure · Deployed in production

Review book concentration without exposing positions

This receipt recomputes concentration counts and share ratios for one book at a stated time using opaque commitments. It reports no group smaller than five members. The service sees no insured identity, dependency name, or policy term. That lets underwriting and reinsurance teams review stated concentration across a book without exposing its individual positions.

What it does not do. It does not show that the commitments are correct, honestly computed, or complete, that any member is insured, and it cannot detect an omitted, duplicated, or miscommitted member. It does not measure or price risk, provide actuarial or capital advice or a reinsurance recommendation, or establish that reported concentration would cause a correlated loss.

Open the Portfolio Exposure Receipt page Canon entry Schema

POST /verify/portfolio-exposure · case pass, a clean record

Nothing has run yet. Click Run it and the answer below comes back from the verifier, not from this page.

POST /verify/portfolio-exposure · case fail, a forged record

Nothing has run yet. Click Run it and the answer below comes back from the verifier, not from this page.

Every run above posts a verified request body from this domain to the open verify route and prints what came back. The example receipts are signed with published example keys, so verify reports key_trust example_registry. That is on purpose. Nothing on this page is a production issuance, a customer record, or an endorsement. Patent Pending.

Set the condition before the window opens

Check a condition that was set before measurement begins

Review book concentration without exposing positions

The exact canon entries behind this page