{ "model": { "rank": 4406, "code": "thing-attack", "model_id": "vr.tr.attack", "name": "attack", "purpose": "(military) an offensive against an enemy (using weapons)", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/attack/", "tier": 2, "score": 75, "payload": { "layer": "wordnet", "aliases": [ "diversionary landing", "onslaught", "onset", "onrush", "air raid", "air attack", "ground attack", "charge", "countercharge", "banzai attack", "banzai charge", "diversion", "diversionary attack", "penetration", "incursion", "interpenetration", "blitz", "blitzkrieg", "breakthrough", "invasion", "infiltration", "foray", "raid", "maraud", "inroad", "swoop", "strike", "first strike", "surgical strike", "preventive strike", "preventive attack", "counterattack", "countermove", "bombing", "bombardment", "bombing run", "carpet bombing", "area bombing", "saturation bombing", "dive-bombing" ], "aliasCount": 107, "merged": 75, "knownIn": 0, "facets": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert", "mobility": "not-applicable", "scale": "not-applicable", "affordances": [ "observable" ] }, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "noun.act", "senseRank": 0, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "oewn:2024", "synset": "oewn-00974725-n", "ili": "i40496", "license": "CC BY 4.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-09T20:08:46Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 20.4, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a087c8-9b5d-7441-ae0a-5ea2083ddbdc\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: attack\nSense to describe: (military) an offensive against an enemy (using weapons)\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch o", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 60.2, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a087c8-9b6a-7573-9b72-5e1561ae631a\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: attack\nRegistry id: vr.tr.attack\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (military) an offensive against an enemy (using weapons)\nNames fo" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-ATTACK", "registryId": "vr.tr.attack", "name": "attack", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/attack/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.attack", "name": "attack", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise, distinguish and assess a reported military attack while preserving uncertainty about its participants, boundaries, effects and classification.", "definition": "A military attack is an offensive action involving armed force against an adversary to achieve a military objective, distinguished from the broader offensive operation of which it may form a part.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the registry sense of attack as a military offensive against an enemy using weapons, including the identity, course and assessment of an individual attack; it records competing interpretations without assuming that military, legal and everyday uses have identical boundaries.", "in_scope": [ "Evidence that an occurrence constitutes a military attack within the registry definition", "Attacking participants, intended enemy and actually affected entities", "Attack boundaries and relationships to engagements, operations and campaigns", "Reported weapon use, event progression and termination", "Intended outcomes, observed effects and competing assessments" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Weapon design, manufacture and technical operating instructions", "Detailed force organisation and individual service records", "Campaign strategy and operational planning beyond links to the containing activity", "Standalone models of defence, deterrence, threats and nonviolent coercion", "Medical treatment, infrastructure repair and displacement management following an attack", "Cyberattacks, personal assaults and figurative attacks unless separately established as within this military sense" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A candidate instance must have evidence of weapons being used against an entity treated as an enemy; a threat, mobilisation or unexecuted order alone does not establish an executed attack.", "The military sense must be supported by context; the word attack in a report is insufficient to distinguish it from personal assault or metaphor.", "An attacking action must be identifiable within the occurrence; an engagement can contain multiple attacks and defensive responses.", "Attack status must be distinguished from strategic posture: an action occurring during a defensive campaign may still be described as an attack.", "Occurrence and success are separate tests: failure to achieve the intended outcome does not by itself show that no attack occurred." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Occurrence status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "reported, corroborated, disputed, disproven, unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Separates evidence that an attack happened from descriptions of what it allegedly accomplished." }, { "name": "Execution phase", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "planned, initiated, ongoing, ended, aborted before initiation, unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Prevents plans and cancelled actions from being counted as executed attacks." }, { "name": "Attacker attribution", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Attributed actor or actors, attribution source, confidence and competing accounts", "why_it_matters": "Supports assessment without converting an allegation into established responsibility." }, { "name": "Intended enemy and affected entities", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Separately identified intended adversary, intended target and actually affected people or objects", "why_it_matters": "Keeps intent, adversarial designation and consequences distinct." }, { "name": "Reported weapon use", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Source-supported weapon or means category; unidentified; disputed", "why_it_matters": "Tests the weapons component of the registry definition without requiring technical employment details." }, { "name": "Event interval", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Start and end timestamps or bounded estimates, with timezone and uncertainty", "why_it_matters": "Helps distinguish one attack from repeated attacks and establishes its reported duration." }, { "name": "Event location and extent", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Named places or geographic bounds at the precision supported by evidence", "why_it_matters": "Supports event matching and distinguishes the place of attack from the area of resulting effects." }, { "name": "Containing military activity", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to engagement, battle, operation or campaign, with the relationship asserted by each source", "why_it_matters": "Preserves registry granularity and avoids treating a whole campaign as one attack." }, { "name": "Outcome assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Achieved, partly achieved, not achieved, disputed or unknown relative to an explicitly recorded objective", "why_it_matters": "Makes success judgments attributable and prevents physical damage from standing in for every intended outcome." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify a reported occurrence against the registry sense and record unresolved boundary cases.", "Reconcile potentially duplicate reports while retaining alternative event boundaries.", "Connect an attack to its participants, affected entities and containing military activity.", "Track execution status and revise assessments as additional evidence appears.", "Compare claimed objectives with documented effects without inferring intent from damage alone.", "Identify missing evidence and route contested classifications for qualified review." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "attack-identity-and-boundaries", "name": "Attack identity and boundaries", "description": "Establishes what qualifies as an attack and which reported actions belong to the same instance.", "rationale": "Military reporting can use attack for actions at different scales, making explicit recognition and counting rules necessary.", "layers": [ { "id": "registry-sense", "name": "Registry sense", "description": "Tests the supplied military meaning against the evidence and terminology of each account.", "findings": [ { "id": "military-attack-recognition", "name": "Military attack recognition", "description": "Record the evidence for military context, offensive action, weapon use and an intended enemy, alongside the definition used by the reporting source.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence supports each component of the registry definition for this occurrence?", "kind": "definition", "id": "military-attack-recognition-q01" }, { "text": "Does the source use attack in a military, legal, everyday or figurative sense, and where does that differ from this model?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "military-attack-recognition-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "attack-individuation", "name": "Attack individuation", "description": "Separates an individual attack from its component actions and containing military activities.", "findings": [ { "id": "single-or-multiple-attacks", "name": "Single or multiple attacks", "description": "Record the grounds for grouping reported actions into one attack, preserving disagreement about interruptions, renewed action and scale.", "questions": [ { "text": "What source-supported boundary makes these actions one attack rather than several?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "single-or-multiple-attacks-q01" }, { "text": "Which engagement, operation or campaign contains this attack, and which records may describe the same occurrence?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "single-or-multiple-attacks-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "participants-intent-and-attribution", "name": "Participants, intent and attribution", "description": "Distinguishes who allegedly attacked, whom they regarded as the enemy and what they reportedly intended to affect.", "rationale": "Responsibility, adversarial identity and target identity can be contested independently.", "layers": [ { "id": "attacking-participants", "name": "Attacking participants", "description": "Captures attributed participation without conflating execution, command and public claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-attacker-roles", "name": "Attributed attacker roles", "description": "Record separately the actors alleged to have executed, directed or claimed the attack, with evidence for each role.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who is reported to have executed, directed or claimed the attack, and by whom?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-attacker-roles-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence supports or contradicts each attribution independently of any public claim of responsibility?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-attacker-roles-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "enemy-target-and-objective", "name": "Enemy, target and objective", "description": "Separates the intended enemy, intended target and stated purpose from entities actually affected.", "findings": [ { "id": "intended-versus-affected", "name": "Intended versus affected", "description": "Maintain distinct records of adversarial designation, target identification, reported objective and observed impact.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who identified the enemy, target and objective, and is the account contemporaneous or retrospective?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "intended-versus-affected-q01" }, { "text": "Which affected people or objects differ from the reported intended target, and what remains unknown about intent?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "intended-versus-affected-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "weapon-use-and-event-course", "name": "Weapon use and event course", "description": "Captures evidence of execution and the bounded progression of the attack.", "rationale": "A model must distinguish preparation from occurrence and recognise when an attack's start or end remains uncertain.", "layers": [ { "id": "execution-evidence", "name": "Execution evidence", "description": "Assesses whether the reported action progressed from intention into weapon use against an enemy.", "findings": [ { "id": "attack-initiation", "name": "Attack initiation", "description": "Record the observation or report used to establish initiation, distinguishing it from orders, threats and preparation.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence establishes that weapon use against the intended enemy began?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attack-initiation-q01" }, { "text": "How should an interrupted or unsuccessful initiation be classified under the adopted definition?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attack-initiation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "temporal-and-spatial-course", "name": "Temporal and spatial course", "description": "Records where and when the attack occurred and what supports a change in execution phase.", "findings": [ { "id": "attack-interval-and-termination", "name": "Attack interval and termination", "description": "Represent reported start, continuation, interruption and end with uncertainty, distinguishing the attack interval from the persistence of its effects.", "questions": [ { "text": "What time interval and geographic extent are supported, and how precise are those estimates?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "attack-interval-and-termination-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes termination from a pause, loss of observation or continuation under a different report?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attack-interval-and-termination-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "effects-and-contested-assessment", "name": "Effects and contested assessment", "description": "Connects observed consequences to the attack and preserves disagreement about outcomes and classification.", "rationale": "An attack's occurrence, consequences, success and permissibility are different judgments requiring different evidence.", "layers": [ { "id": "effects-and-objective-assessment", "name": "Effects and objective assessment", "description": "Records documented consequences and compares them with explicitly attributed objectives.", "findings": [ { "id": "observed-effects-versus-claimed-success", "name": "Observed effects versus claimed success", "description": "Separate reports of casualties, damage and disruption from causal attribution and claims that an objective was achieved.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which effects are documented, with what counting method, observation period and uncertainty?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "observed-effects-versus-claimed-success-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence connects those effects to this attack and supports any claim that its stated objective was achieved?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "observed-effects-versus-claimed-success-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretation-and-review", "name": "Interpretation and review", "description": "Preserves competing military or legal classifications and identifies evidence needed before consequential use of the record.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-classifications-and-review-needs", "name": "Attributed classifications and review needs", "description": "Record classifications with their authors, definitions and supporting evidence; treat the enemy label as an attributed designation rather than a determination of permissible targeting.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which authorities or sources disagree about the attack's classification, and which definitions or facts explain the disagreement?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributed-classifications-and-review-needs-q01" }, { "text": "Which unresolved claims require further evidence or qualified review before an agent relies on the assessment?", "kind": "action", "id": "attributed-classifications-and-review-needs-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "This describes the military action sense, excluding medical, rhetorical and other senses of attack.", "The legal meaning of attack can include violence undertaken in defence; it should not be equated mechanically with the doctrinal category of offensive action.", "Recalled references have not been checked; researchers should verify current doctrinal terminology and whether a particular doctrine treats raids and ambushes as attack subtypes or separate forms of action." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Deliberate attack", "Hasty attack", "Counterattack", "Spoiling attack", "Raid", "Ambush" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions: treaty framework adopted by states that defines attacks for its purposes and regulates their conduct.", "Hague Regulations of 1907: interstate treaty rules concerning the conduct of hostilities.", "NATO AAP-06: NATO glossary standardizing military terms and definitions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Describing and classifying actions in military doctrine and operational reporting.", "Analysing historical engagements and their outcomes.", "Assessing conduct of hostilities under international humanitarian law.", "Representing combat events in military simulations and exercises." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Duration", "typical_range": "No universal range; depends on the boundaries assigned to the action.", "unit": "seconds, minutes, hours or days" }, { "quantity": "Personnel casualties", "typical_range": "Event-specific; categories and reporting completeness vary.", "unit": "persons" }, { "quantity": "Ammunition expenditure", "typical_range": "Event-specific and dependent on weapon type.", "unit": "rounds or munitions, counted separately by type" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Misidentification of targets or reliance on inaccurate intelligence.", "Civilian deaths, injuries and damage to civilian objects.", "Fratricide and other unintended effects on friendly forces.", "Failure to achieve the intended military objective despite expenditure and losses.", "Escalation or unintended expansion of hostilities." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Military doctrines differ in their classification of attacks and their relationships to raids, ambushes and assaults.", "Treaty participation, national legal interpretations and rules of engagement vary between states." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "name": "offensive operation", "difference": "An offensive operation is a broader undertaking that may include multiple attacks, movement and supporting activities." }, { "name": "assault", "difference": "An assault commonly denotes the close engagement or culminating action against a position; an attack need not include an assault." }, { "name": "battle", "difference": "A battle encompasses an engagement between opposing forces and may contain multiple attacks and defensive actions." }, { "name": "defence", "difference": "Defence primarily seeks to resist or defeat an adversary's offensive action, although it may include counterattacks." }, { "name": "armed attack", "difference": "In the law governing resort to force, armed attack is a legal category associated with self-defence; it is not automatically coextensive with every military attack." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of attack this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which military reference definitions best operationalise the registry wording, particularly offensive and enemy?", "How should this registry sense handle counterattacks and weapon use during defensive action without confusing tactical action with strategic posture?", "What event-counting conventions should distinguish one attack from repeated strikes, a prolonged bombardment or a wider engagement?", "Where should the boundary fall for attempted initiation, accidental weapon discharge and attacks based on mistaken target identity?", "Does an existing Vercy world model already cover this concept, and which relationships to attack, engagement, operation and campaign should be reused?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 9, "findings": 16, "questions": 24 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "abstract concept", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched.", "facetsInferred": false, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a attack, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "(military) an offensive against an enemy (using weapons)", "characteristics": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: diversionary landing, onslaught, onset, onrush, air raid, air attack, ground attack, charge, countercharge, banzai attack, banzai charge, diversion.", "75 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it." ], "openQuestionsForResearch": [ "Which of the bundles below does a real task actually need, and which are ceremony?", "What does this thing have that the facets do not capture at all?", "Which neighbouring kind is most often confused with a attack, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "something that happens over time", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "observe it, measure it, record its state" ], "howItIsRecognised": [ "Nothing to see. What is recognised is an instance of it, and which instances count is exactly what is argued about." ], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "diversionary landing", "onslaught", "onset", "onrush", "air raid", "air attack", "ground attack", "charge", "countercharge", "banzai attack", "banzai charge", "diversion" ] } ], "standing": "75 finer distinctions are held inside this entry as names rather than as separate models.", "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-and-classification", "name": "Identity, naming and classification", "description": "How an agent tells one attack from another, and a attack from things that resemble it.", "rationale": "Recognition comes before every other claim. Without stable identity nothing else in the model can be trusted to be about the same thing twice.", "layers": [ { "id": "naming-and-identifiers", "name": "Names and identifiers", "description": "The names this thing goes by and the identifiers that survive translation and time.", "findings": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases", "name": "Preferred name, aliases and local names", "description": "Which name to use, which names mean the same thing, and which merely sound similar.", "questions": [ { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the name of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the name of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "preferred-name-and-aliases-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the name of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers", "name": "Stable identifiers and external keys", "description": "Identifiers that keep pointing at this kind of thing across systems and languages.", "questions": [ { "id": "stable-identifiers-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an identifier for a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an identifier for a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stable-identifiers-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an identifier for a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-granularity", "name": "Classification and granularity", "description": "Where a attack sits among kinds, and how finely a task needs to cut it.", "findings": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents", "name": "Kind, parents and neighbouring kinds", "description": "The classes this thing belongs to and the ones it is next to.", "questions": [ { "id": "kind-and-parents-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the kind of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the kind of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "kind-and-parents-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the kind of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features", "name": "Distinguishing features", "description": "What separates a attack from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about what distinguishes a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "distinguishing-features-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once what distinguishes a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "state-and-lifecycle", "name": "State and lifecycle", "description": "The states a attack passes through and the events that move it between them.", "rationale": "Most decisions about a thing depend on what state it is in now, which is a claim with a time on it, not a property.", "layers": [ { "id": "lifecycle-stages", "name": "Lifecycle stages", "description": "From coming into existence to ceasing to be one of these.", "findings": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions", "name": "Stages and transitions", "description": "The stages worth naming and what moves a attack between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the lifecycle of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the lifecycle of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observations-and-status", "name": "Observations and current status", "description": "What is observed about a attack, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a attack is recorded so that it can be superseded rather than overwritten.", "questions": [ { "id": "observation-record-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes an observation of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about an observation of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "observation-record-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once an observation of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "process-and-outcome", "name": "Process, inputs and outcome", "description": "How a attack proceeds, what it needs and what it leaves behind.", "rationale": "An activity is known by its steps and its results, and both have to be recordable while it is still running.", "layers": [ { "id": "steps-and-sequence", "name": "Steps and sequence", "description": "The steps of a attack, their order and what may run in parallel.", "findings": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions", "name": "Steps, preconditions and completion", "description": "What has to be true before each step of a attack and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a step of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a step of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-results", "name": "Inputs, resources and results", "description": "What a attack consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a attack takes and the results it leaves, wanted or not.", "questions": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the inputs and results of a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the inputs and results of a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the inputs and results of a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "definitions-in-contest", "name": "Definitions and who holds them", "description": "What attack is taken to mean, and by whom.", "rationale": "When a field disagrees about a concept, the disagreement is the content. A model that picks one definition silently destroys the information.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-definitions", "name": "Competing definitions", "description": "The main readings and the traditions behind them.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-map", "name": "Definitions and their holders", "description": "Each definition with the school or body that holds it.", "questions": [ { "id": "definition-map-q01", "text": "Which definitions of attack are in use, and which tradition or body holds each?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "definition-map-q02", "text": "What turns on the difference between them in practice?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operationalisation", "name": "Operationalisation", "description": "How it is measured or applied when it has to be.", "findings": [ { "id": "operational-record", "name": "Measures and proxies", "description": "Instruments and indicators used to stand in for it.", "questions": [ { "id": "operational-record-q01", "text": "How is attack operationalised or measured in practice, and by what instrument?", "kind": "measurement" }, { "id": "operational-record-q02", "text": "What does that operationalisation leave out, and when does that matter?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "instances-and-use", "name": "Instances, use and consequence", "description": "What counts as an instance of attack and what follows from calling something that.", "rationale": "Applying a concept is an act with consequences, so a model must say what the label licenses and what it does not.", "layers": [ { "id": "instances", "name": "What counts as an instance", "description": "Clear cases, borderline cases and non-cases.", "findings": [ { "id": "instance-tests", "name": "Tests for an instance", "description": "What would settle whether something falls under it.", "questions": [ { "id": "instance-tests-q01", "text": "What would settle whether something is an instance of attack?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "instance-tests-q02", "text": "Which borderline cases are argued about, and on what grounds?", "kind": "definition" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequence", "name": "Consequence of application", "description": "Rights, duties or decisions that follow from the label.", "findings": [ { "id": "consequence-record", "name": "What the label licenses", "description": "What an agent may do once something is classified this way.", "questions": [ { "id": "consequence-record-q01", "text": "What follows practically once something is treated as attack?", "kind": "action" }, { "id": "consequence-record-q02", "text": "What must an agent not infer from the label alone?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a attack came from and when it held.", "rationale": "A claim without a source and a time cannot be superseded, only overwritten, and an agent that overwrites loses the ability to explain itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-and-authority", "name": "Source and authority", "description": "Who said it, on what evidence, and how strongly.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-provenance", "name": "Claim provenance and confidence", "description": "The authority behind each claim about a attack and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a claim about a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "claim-provenance-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a claim about a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "time-and-versions", "name": "Time, versions and supersession", "description": "When a claim was true, when it was learnt, and what replaced it.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession", "name": "Validity period and supersession", "description": "How an old claim about a attack is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a attack, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the validity of a claim about a attack, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the validity of a claim about a attack is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 14, "questions": 38 } } } }