The superassertability theory of truth, inspired by Crispin Wright (1992, 2003), holds that a statement is true iff it is superassertable in the following sense: it possesses warrant that cannot be defeated by any improvement of our information. While initially promising, the superassertability theory of truth is vulnerable to a persistent difficulty highlighted by Van Cleve (1996) and Horgan (1995) but not properly fleshed out: it is formally/informally illegitimate in a similar sense that unsophisticated epistemic theories of truth (theories that identify truth with bare warranted assertability) are widely acknowledged to be. Sustained analysis reveals that the unrestricted formal/informal legitimacy argument is firmly grounded in first-person conceivability/possibility evidence.
Hoffmann, Glen A., "Truth, Superassertability, and Conceivability" (2008). Philosophy Publications and Research. Paper 13.