ASI 2030, a studio in the RISCON family, publishes synthetic records of an imagined path to artificial superintelligence between late 2026 and the end of 2030. In each record an AI system makes a judgment about someone's case and a human auditor gives it one of the four opinions of financial auditing. None of the records reports a real event, and the developments toward advanced AI that they describe are the studio's scenarios, not forecasts made here. This paper reads the eleven records the studio files under correctability in its two branches for 2029 and 2030, and asks how the record set places the correction of a judgment in time: who keeps the clock, how long a person waits, and what would reopen the judgment.
The finding is that correction, in these scenarios, is a matter of who owns the clock. In the first branch the clock is readable: the delay of a correction is counted in days and percentiles, most judgments set a condition for their own revision, and a correction once made is cited as a standard by later records. In the second branch the clock belongs to the provider: no deadline is given in several records, in four of the six the reviewer is or may be the system that decided, one record treats waiting as costless, and all six opinions are disclaimers. The paper adds to the debates on contestability, on discretion moving from officials to systems, and on the limits of transparency.