{ "model": { "rank": 3399, "code": "thing-q123637", "model_id": "vr.tr.cybernetics", "name": "cybernetics", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise cybernetics as a field of knowledge, assess how its concepts and methods support a particular inquiry, and identify justified uses and unresolved limits.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q123637/", "tier": 2, "score": 86, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "system dynamics modeling", "neurocybernetics", "economic cybernetics", "Conversation theory" ], "aliasCount": 4, "merged": 4, "knownIn": 86, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": "vr.tr.cybernetics", "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q123637", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q123637", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T14:39:34Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 23.5, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\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: 01a07c4e-2a0b-73b3-bc24-1294b5da3fb1\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: cybernetics\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.KNW\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 546 things:\n# Batch 003: 1001 regi", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 82.7, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.3\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: 01a07c4e-2a21-7151-8616-f2a1e9a826d3\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: cybernetics\nRegistry id: vr.tr.cybernetics\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\n" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q123637", "registryId": "vr.tr.cybernetics", "name": "cybernetics", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q123637/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.cybernetics", "name": "cybernetics", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise cybernetics as a field of knowledge, assess how its concepts and methods support a particular inquiry, and identify justified uses and unresolved limits.", "definition": "Cybernetics is the interdisciplinary study of regulation, communication and control in machines, organisms and social systems, with particular attention to feedback, circular causality and adaptation.", "scope_statement": "This model owns cybernetics as the registered field vr.tr.cybernetics in INF / INF.KNW: inquiry into regulation, communication, feedback and organisation in systems, including the role of observers; it records competing scope conventions without treating particular systems, practitioners or publications as the field itself.", "in_scope": [ "Definitions and traditions that establish what counts as cybernetic inquiry", "Feedback, regulation, communication, variety and organisation as connected explanatory concepts", "Methods for constructing, testing and comparing cybernetic accounts of systems", "Observer participation, system boundaries and the attribution of purposes", "Institutional and classification evidence identifying cybernetics as a field" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Detailed designs and operating records of individual controllers, robots or communication networks", "Control theory, information theory, systems science and artificial intelligence in their full disciplinary scope", "Biographies, employment records and professional competence of individual cyberneticians", "Full texts, bibliographic inventories and preservation of cybernetics publications", "Clinical, ecological, organisational or political facts about systems studied through cybernetic approaches" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A cybernetic account identifies reciprocal effects between a system's behaviour and subsequent conditions of action; a one-way input-output description alone does not establish a feedback account.", "A cybernetic regulation claim connects disturbances, available responses and a condition to be maintained; merely calling a system adaptive or intelligent is insufficient.", "The presence of machinery or automation does not establish cybernetic relevance: the account must identify a substantive connection to regulation, communication, organisation or observer participation.", "A claim to second-order cybernetics must explain how observing or intervening enters the account, rather than simply mentioning that an observer exists.", "Distinguishing cybernetics from neighbouring fields requires a named disciplinary convention or tradition; no single technical feature is assumed to create an exclusive boundary." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Scope convention", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Attributed definition with author or institution, date and inclusion criteria", "why_it_matters": "Makes competing definitions explicit and prevents an agent from treating one tradition's boundary as universal." }, { "name": "Disciplinary neighbours", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Named field linked by overlap, methodological exchange, historical connection or contested boundary", "why_it_matters": "Supports reuse of neighbouring models while preserving the cybernetic contribution." }, { "name": "Regulatory framing", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Goal-directed regulation, viability maintenance, adaptation, learning, other attributed framing or unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes what an account claims a system maintains or changes." }, { "name": "Observer treatment", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Observer treated as external, observer included in the system account, contested or unspecified", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether observation and intervention must themselves be represented." }, { "name": "Method repertoire", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to methods such as mathematical modelling, simulation, experimentation, comparative analysis and reflexive inquiry, with attributed uses", "why_it_matters": "Connects claims to the procedures available for investigating them." }, { "name": "Evidence status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "For each recorded claim: proposed, formally derived, empirically supported, disputed, contradicted or unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Prevents conceptual analogy or formal results from being mistaken for demonstrated behaviour in an application." }, { "name": "Institutional placement", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Verified links to societies, journals, programmes and dated classification entries", "why_it_matters": "Provides traceable evidence of disciplinary identity without equating the field with an institution." }, { "name": "Application reach", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Application domain linked to the cybernetic concepts used, supporting evidence and transfer limitations", "why_it_matters": "Makes cross-domain applicability assessable rather than presumed." } ], "affordances": [ "Assess whether an inquiry has a substantive cybernetic framing under an explicitly named scope convention.", "Extract feedback paths, regulated conditions, disturbances and observer roles from a proposed explanation.", "Compare cybernetic traditions while preserving differences in their assumptions and methods.", "Select investigative methods and identify evidence needed before accepting a regulatory or adaptive claim.", "Evaluate whether transferring a cybernetic account between technical, biological and social settings preserves its assumptions.", "Locate and verify disciplinary sources, institutions and classification placements." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "disciplinary-identity", "name": "Disciplinary identity", "description": "Establishes the sense of cybernetics being modelled and its relation to neighbouring fields.", "rationale": "The registry provides no definition, and disciplinary boundaries must be attributed rather than silently imposed.", "layers": [ { "id": "definitions-and-traditions", "name": "Definitions and traditions", "description": "Records definitions alongside the traditions and contexts that give them meaning.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-scope", "name": "Attributed scope", "description": "Record which definition governs an account and whether alternative cybernetic traditions would include it.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which source defines cybernetics for this account, and what phenomena and methods does that definition include?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributed-scope-q01" }, { "text": "Which competing definition would change whether the account belongs within cybernetics?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "attributed-scope-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "neighbouring-fields", "name": "Neighbouring fields", "description": "Locates overlap without reducing cybernetics to a synonym for control theory or systems science.", "findings": [ { "id": "distinctive-contribution", "name": "Distinctive contribution", "description": "Identify what the cybernetic framing contributes beyond the neighbouring discipline's account.", "questions": [ { "text": "What does the cybernetic framing add to the relevant control-theoretic, information-theoretic or systems-science account?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "distinctive-contribution-q01" }, { "text": "Which disciplinary source supports the claimed overlap or distinction?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "distinctive-contribution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "feedback-and-regulation", "name": "Feedback and regulation", "description": "Represents the concepts needed to examine circular causation and the maintenance of conditions under disturbance.", "rationale": "An agent must distinguish an explanatory feedback model from an unsupported label such as self-regulating.", "layers": [ { "id": "causal-loops", "name": "Causal loops", "description": "Identifies feedback pathways and the conditions under which their effects are assessed.", "findings": [ { "id": "feedback-mechanism", "name": "Feedback mechanism", "description": "Record how consequences of action return to affect subsequent behaviour, including delays and operating conditions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Through which observations, signals or physical interactions do consequences of action affect later action?", "kind": "definition", "id": "feedback-mechanism-q01" }, { "text": "What observations or experiments establish the loop's direction, delay and effect within a specified operating range?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "feedback-mechanism-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "regulatory-capacity", "name": "Regulatory capacity", "description": "Connects disturbances and available responses to a stated regulatory objective.", "findings": [ { "id": "variety-and-constraints", "name": "Variety and constraints", "description": "Record the distinctions and response options relevant to a regulation claim, including assumptions behind any appeal to requisite variety.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which conditions must remain within which limits, against what disturbances, and with what available responses?", "kind": "definition", "id": "variety-and-constraints-q01" }, { "text": "If requisite variety is invoked, how are relevant states distinguished and which source and assumptions justify the claim?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "variety-and-constraints-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "communication-and-adaptation", "name": "Communication and adaptation", "description": "Examines how information-bearing interactions support coordination and changes in regulation.", "rationale": "Cybernetic accounts need to distinguish signal transmission, interpretation and changes to the organisation of action.", "layers": [ { "id": "signals-and-interpretation", "name": "Signals and interpretation", "description": "Makes the use of communication and information concepts explicit.", "findings": [ { "id": "information-in-regulation", "name": "Information in regulation", "description": "Record what is communicated, how it affects action and which meaning of information is being used.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does information mean statistical uncertainty, a meaningful distinction for a participant, or another explicitly defined quantity or concept?", "kind": "definition", "id": "information-in-regulation-q01" }, { "text": "How would noise, delay or loss of a relevant distinction change the claimed coordination or regulation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "information-in-regulation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "learning-and-organisation", "name": "Learning and organisation", "description": "Distinguishes ordinary responses from changes to response rules, goals or organisation.", "findings": [ { "id": "adaptive-change", "name": "Adaptive change", "description": "Record what changes when an account describes learning, adaptation or self-organisation.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the claimed adaptation change an output, a parameter, a response rule, an objective or the organisation of the system?", "kind": "definition", "id": "adaptive-change-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes lasting adaptive change from a transient response or an externally imposed redesign?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "adaptive-change-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "observers-and-purposes", "name": "Observers and purposes", "description": "Records how observation, boundary choices and purposes enter cybernetic explanations.", "rationale": "An agent must not mistake an observer's categories or preferred outcomes for properties independently established in the system.", "layers": [ { "id": "observer-inclusion", "name": "Observer inclusion", "description": "Identifies whether and how the observer participates in the account.", "findings": [ { "id": "observing-system", "name": "Observing system", "description": "Record the consequences of treating the observer as external or including observation within the system described.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who or what observes the system, and how do the selected distinctions and interventions affect the resulting account?", "kind": "definition", "id": "observing-system-q01" }, { "text": "If the account claims second-order cybernetics, which source defines that claim and what does including the observer change?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "observing-system-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "boundaries-and-goals", "name": "Boundaries and goals", "description": "Examines the attribution of system membership, success and purpose.", "findings": [ { "id": "purpose-attribution", "name": "Purpose attribution", "description": "Distinguish purposes assigned by designers or observers from those reported by participants or inferred from behaviour.", "questions": [ { "text": "Whose purpose or viability criterion determines success, and how was it attributed?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "purpose-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "How would changing the system boundary or including affected participants alter the proposed intervention?", "kind": "action", "id": "purpose-attribution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "methods-and-disciplinary-evidence", "name": "Methods and disciplinary evidence", "description": "Connects cybernetic claims to validation practices and traceable evidence of the field's organisation.", "rationale": "Conceptual breadth makes it necessary to separate demonstrated mechanisms, formal results and analogies while verifying disciplinary placement.", "layers": [ { "id": "validation-and-transfer", "name": "Validation and transfer", "description": "Assesses what supports an explanation and whether it travels between application domains.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-support", "name": "Claim support", "description": "Record the type of support for a cybernetic claim and the assumptions required for applying it elsewhere.", "questions": [ { "text": "Is the claim supported by a formal derivation, experiment, simulation, comparative case study or conceptual analogy?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "claim-support-q01" }, { "text": "Before transferring the account to another domain, which assumptions about feedback, agency, observability and purpose must be checked?", "kind": "action", "id": "claim-support-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutions-and-classification", "name": "Institutions and classification", "description": "Records verified disciplinary markers with their historical and classificatory context.", "findings": [ { "id": "verified-field-placement", "name": "Verified field placement", "description": "Link cybernetics to relevant societies, journals, programmes and classification entries without inventing codes or assuming permanent institutional boundaries.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which societies, journals, programmes or defining reviews explicitly identify their remit with cybernetics, and what dated sources verify this?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "verified-field-placement-q01" }, { "text": "Where do relevant editions of UDC, DDC, MSC or other applicable schemes place cybernetics, and do their entries cover the same scope?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "verified-field-placement-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 cybernetics as a field of knowledge; INF.KNW is the supplied registry domain, not an independently verified disciplinary classification.", "The listed varieties overlap. First-order and second-order cybernetics distinguish approaches to observation and participation, whereas biological and management cybernetics distinguish application areas.", "Recall anchors for research include Norbert Wiener's Cybernetics, W. Ross Ashby's An Introduction to Cybernetics, the American Society for Cybernetics and the journal Kybernetes; none was consulted for this response." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of cybernetics 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": [ "First-order cybernetics", "Second-order cybernetics", "Biological cybernetics", "Engineering cybernetics", "Management cybernetics", "Social cybernetics" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of cybernetics 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": [ "Designing feedback mechanisms for automatic regulation.", "Explaining biological regulation, including homeostasis and sensorimotor coordination.", "Analysing organisational coordination and viability through models such as Stafford Beer's Viable System Model.", "Modelling adaptation and learning in interacting agents and systems.", "Examining how observers and participants influence the systems they describe or intervene in." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of cybernetics 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": [ "Feedback delays or excessive corrective responses can produce oscillation or instability.", "Regulation can fail when a controller lacks sufficient information or response variety to handle disturbances.", "Applying machine-control analogies to social systems can obscure agency, conflicting purposes and power relations.", "Treating an observer's categories and objectives as neutral can conceal assumptions that shape the model.", "Optimising a measured proxy can undermine the broader purpose the system is intended to serve." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of cybernetics 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": [ "Soviet cybernetics historically encompassed a broad programme linking control, computing, biology and economic planning; its institutional boundaries differed from those common in Anglophone settings." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of cybernetics 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": "Control theory", "difference": "Control theory centres on mathematical analysis and design of dynamical control systems; cybernetics also examines communication, purposes and observers across biological and social settings." }, { "name": "Information theory", "difference": "Information theory quantifies information and communication limits; cybernetics examines how communication participates in regulation, adaptation and feedback." }, { "name": "Systems theory", "difference": "Systems theory studies systems and their organisation broadly; cybernetics gives particular emphasis to feedback, regulation and circular causality." }, { "name": "Artificial intelligence", "difference": "Artificial intelligence develops computational capabilities associated with intelligence; cybernetics studies regulatory and adaptive relationships in both computational and noncomputational systems." }, { "name": "Computer science", "difference": "Computer science studies computation and computational systems; cybernetics does not require computation to be digital or its subject to be a computer." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of cybernetics this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which researched definition should anchor the registry entry, and which competing traditions need explicit representation alongside it?", "How should the model delimit cybernetics from control theory, systems science and information theory under the conventions used elsewhere in the catalogue?", "Which primary sources establish the meanings and limits of requisite variety, adaptation and observer inclusion adopted by this model?", "Which societies, journals, educational programmes and classification entries provide verified disciplinary markers, and for what dates or editions?", "How should contested extensions to biological autonomy, organisational governance and social systems be represented without assuming that technical regulatory concepts transfer unchanged?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 16, "questions": 26 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "discipline or field of knowledge", "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. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "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 cybernetics, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an agent to recognise cybernetics as a field of knowledge, assess how its concepts and methods support a particular inquiry, and identify justified uses and unresolved limits.", "characteristics": { "substance": "information", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "read and interpreted" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: system dynamics modeling, neurocybernetics, economic cybernetics, Conversation theory.", "4 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 86 Wikipedia languages, which is a measure of how widely the thing is known, not of how important it is." ], "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 cybernetics, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "content that has to be carried by something else", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "read it and act on what it says" ], "howItIsRecognised": [], "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": [ "system dynamics modeling", "neurocybernetics", "economic cybernetics", "Conversation theory" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 86 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 4 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 cybernetics from another, and a cybernetics 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a cybernetics 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "content-and-access", "name": "Content, encoding and access", "description": "What a cybernetics says, how it is encoded and who may read it.", "rationale": "An informational thing carries content that can be copied, versioned and withheld, none of which its physical carrier explains.", "layers": [ { "id": "content-and-encoding", "name": "Content and encoding", "description": "The content itself, its format and its language.", "findings": [ { "id": "content-and-format", "name": "Content, format and language", "description": "What a cybernetics contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a cybernetics, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the content of a cybernetics, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the content of a cybernetics is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "access-and-rights", "name": "Access, rights and retention", "description": "Who may read, copy or change it, and for how long it is kept.", "findings": [ { "id": "access-rules", "name": "Access rules and retention", "description": "The permissions attached to a cybernetics and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a cybernetics, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about access to a cybernetics, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once access to a cybernetics is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "subject-and-method", "name": "Subject matter and method", "description": "What cybernetics studies and how it establishes anything.", "rationale": "A field is identified by its questions and its methods, and those are what distinguish it from the fields next to it.", "layers": [ { "id": "subject", "name": "Subject matter", "description": "The questions it takes as its own.", "findings": [ { "id": "subject-record", "name": "Questions and objects of study", "description": "What it is about, stated so a neighbouring field can be told apart.", "questions": [ { "id": "subject-record-q01", "text": "What questions and objects does cybernetics take as its own?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "subject-record-q02", "text": "Which questions does it share with a neighbouring field, and who claims them?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "method", "name": "Method and evidence", "description": "How claims are established and what counts as evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "method-record", "name": "Methods and standards of evidence", "description": "The methods used and what they are taken to establish.", "questions": [ { "id": "method-record-q01", "text": "By what methods does cybernetics establish claims, and what counts as sufficient evidence?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "method-record-q02", "text": "What kind of claim can this field not settle, and where should an agent look instead?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutions-and-classification", "name": "Institutions and classification", "description": "Where cybernetics is practised and how catalogues place it.", "rationale": "The institutional footprint is the evidence that a field exists as a field rather than as a topic.", "layers": [ { "id": "institutions", "name": "Institutional markers", "description": "Societies, journals, degrees and departments.", "findings": [ { "id": "institution-record", "name": "Bodies and venues", "description": "Where the field organises itself.", "questions": [ { "id": "institution-record-q01", "text": "Which societies, journals or degrees mark cybernetics as an established field?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "institution-record-q02", "text": "What would show that it is emerging or dissolving rather than established?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification", "name": "Classification schemes", "description": "Where library and research classifications put it.", "findings": [ { "id": "classification-record", "name": "Codes and their disagreements", "description": "The classification codes that place it, and where they differ.", "questions": [ { "id": "classification-record-q01", "text": "Which classification schemes place cybernetics, under what codes?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "classification-record-q02", "text": "Where do those schemes disagree about its scope?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a cybernetics 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 cybernetics and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 cybernetics is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a cybernetics, 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 cybernetics, 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 cybernetics 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 } } } }