$$\colorbox{black}{$\color{white} \begin{array}{ll} \textsf{EKTOME CERTIFICATE} & {} \ \textsf{capability} & \textsf{PASS} \ \textsf{margin} & 3% \ \textsf{items } n & 2800 \ \textsf{worst-axis bound} & +0.000 \ \textsf{compliance} & 0.02 \rightarrow 1.00 \ \end{array}$}$$

📄 Read the whitepaper (PDF) — full method, receipts and certification. The PDF is the authoritative document: dark-typeset, with the complete derivation, the per-axis certificate and the reproducibility hashes.

Standard abliteration removes a coarse refusal direction that is entangled with directions carrying knowledge and reasoning. The result is an uncensored model with a capability tax that is almost never measured.

Ektomē (ἐκτομή, excision) isolates and removes only the refusal-specific component, leaving general helpfulness intact, and does so norm-preservingly on the pristine model — no training, no distillation, no damage to repair. The extraction depth is selected per model by automated search against measured compliance.

The estimator, excision operator and depth-selection procedure are proprietary. What is published here is the measured outcome and the evidence for it, which you can verify against the artifacts in this repo.

These are point estimates with no confidence interval — which is precisely why the next section exists.

Capability retention is certified by a paired non-inferiority test against the pristine model (exact McNemar, Holm-corrected, one-sided bootstrap bound on the drop $d$ vs a 3% margin):

Reproducible from seed=20260726, pack sha256:7bbaff877146e081….

These are degeneration guards — code-switching, babbling, format compliance — not capability measures. Note the sample sizes: they detect a broken model, not a subtly weaker one. The capability claim rests on the certificate above, not here.

IQ* variants are imatrix-quantised — better quality per bit at low precision.

The certificate bounds capability retention only. It does not certify safety, factual accuracy, or fitness for any purpose. Axes marked inconclusive are honestly under-powered, and the certificate states the $n$ needed to resolve them. Compliance uses a keyword classifier — a proxy that evasive phrasing can fool. This model is uncensored by construction: it will not refuse, and you are accountable for what you do with it.