AI-SPM vs Single-Judge Scanner
A single-judge scanner asks one LLM whether an attack succeeded; a multi-judge pipeline asks several and reconciles them. Single-model scoring inherits that model's blind spots and bias. Penaxtra scores each adversarial output with deterministic checks that run inside our own infrastructure; a three-judge plus meta-judge panel (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google) is built for cases that need model scoring and ships switched off. A verdict that is not confident is reported as inconclusive rather than counted as a pass.
Last reviewed September 2026
What AI-SPM vs Single-Judge Scanner really means
Single-Judge Scanner addresses one part of AI risk. What it leaves uncovered is the rest of the AI surface: a single model grading another single model inherits the same blind spots; no consensus mechanism, no human review queue for low-confidence cases.
How Penaxtra closes the gap
AI-SPM covers the AI-specific layer directly: 11 AI asset kinds today, adversarial testing scored by deterministic checks, a self-hosted runtime gateway, and control-ID evidence across seven frameworks. It usually runs alongside Single-Judge Scanner, since the two address different layers. Plans and what each tier includes are on the pricing page.
What Penaxtra adds
Self-hosted runtime gateway with Ed25519-signed policy distribution
Deterministic checks on every adversarial response; a three-judge panel (Anthropic, OpenAI, Google) is built for cases that need model scoring and shipped switched off on every adversarial finding
Six-framework compliance mapping at control-ID level
PDF + JSON audit-evidence export with twenty-five cross-framework overlaps
Compliance coverage compared
AI-SPM evidence stands alongside Single-Judge Scanner findings; the two cover different ground and are used together.