monogamy
Enable an agent to recognise the sense of monogamy being described, assess its stated or observed status over time, and identify which interpretations or actions the available evidence supports.
Research draft, second pass
A second pass drafted this model: the structure a model of this thing needs, and what is known about it in the world. The line under this one says how the second half was obtained - researched against sources, or recalled without web access, in which case nothing here was read anywhere and every claim is a lead to verify. Unreviewed either way.
recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read
Researched by: Codex
Purpose and description
Enable an agent to recognise the sense of monogamy being described, assess its stated or observed status over time, and identify which interpretations or actions the available evidence supports.
Monogamy is a relationship or mating arrangement involving one partner at a time, with marital, social, sexual, and genetic exclusivity distinguished because they do not necessarily coincide.
It can be Disambiguate a monogamy claim by identifying its exclusivity frame, target and time interval.; Compare participants' stated boundaries and identify unresolved differences without assigning blame.; Assess whether available evidence supports a particular monogamy classification.; Distinguish successive partnerships from overlapping partnerships using a qualified timeline.; Identify when a rule or agreement needs clarification before proposing relationship-related action.; Compare research claims only after checking that their definitions and observation units are compatible..
Distinguishing features
A classification must identify what is exclusive: spouses, romantic partners, sexual partners, social partners or reproductive partners.
Having several partners successively does not establish concurrent nonmonogamy; the relevant periods and their overlap must be recorded.
An exclusive agreement and behaviour consistent with that agreement are separate propositions requiring separate evidence.
A marriage rule, a person's relationship preference and an observed partnership pattern operate at different levels and cannot substitute for one another.
Social pairing alone does not establish sexual exclusivity or exclusive genetic parentage.
Scope
+ Definitions distinguishing marital, romantic, sexual, social and genetic senses of monogamy
+ Exclusivity expectations and agreements within human partnerships
+ Concurrent versus successive partnerships and the time intervals used to classify them
+ Institutional prescriptions and their relationship to individual arrangements
+ Evidence supporting or limiting classifications of monogamy in human and nonhuman contexts
- Marriage ceremonies, registration procedures and complete marriage law
- Comprehensive models of polygamy, polyamory and other relationship arrangements
- Sexual orientation, gender identity and personality classifications
- Complete accounts of kinship, households and parenting
- Species-wide reproductive biology and evolutionary explanations
- Clinical diagnosis or treatment of relationship difficulties
Characteristics
- Exclusivity frame
- marital | romantic | sexual | social | genetic; multiple frames permitted Specifies which sense of monogamy a claim concerns.
- Classification target
- individual | partnership | institution | population | species-level claim Prevents a claim about a rule or population from being assigned automatically to an individual relationship.
- Claim basis
- prescribed norm | expressed preference | explicit agreement | reported behaviour | observed pattern | parentage evidence Separates what is expected or intended from what evidence indicates occurred.
- Concurrent qualifying partner count
- partners per specified frame and interval; unknown permitted Tests numerical exclusivity only after the meaning of a qualifying partner has been established.
- Assessment interval
- start and end dates, or a named interval such as breeding season; duration in days or years when appropriate Distinguishes a time-bounded classification from an unsupported lifetime claim.
- Agreement alignment
- mutually explicit | partially aligned | disputed | unstated | unknown | not applicable Shows whether participants share the exclusivity boundary attributed to their partnership.
- Institutional context
- links to applicable legal, religious or customary rules, with place and date Locates prescriptions without treating them as evidence of individual conduct.
- Evidence status
- supported within stated limits | contradicted | mixed | insufficient | unassessed Makes the limits of a monogamy classification visible.
Also called
Where this came from
wikidata · CC0 1.0
Drafted structure
Bundle to layer to finding to question, as the second pass will find it: 6 bundles · 11 layers · 16 findings · 26 questions.
Senses and boundaries Establishes which meaning of monogamy applies and what counts as an exclusive partnership.
The word can describe different relationships between pairing, marriage, sexual conduct and reproduction.
Exclusivity frames
Separates dimensions that a monogamy claim may combine.
Specified exclusive domain
Record the domain of exclusivity explicitly and preserve separate classifications where domains differ.
- Does monogamy here concern marriage, romance, sexual activity, social pairing, genetic parentage or a specified combination? definition
- Which additional forms of exclusivity, if any, are being assumed without separate evidence? boundary
Qualifying partnerships
Defines the relationship threshold and the entity being classified.
Partner and target definition
Specify who or what is classified and which relationships count before interpreting partner counts.
- What makes someone a qualifying partner in the selected frame? definition
- Is the claim about an individual's conduct, a partnership, an institutional rule or a population pattern? boundary
Human agreements and norms Distinguishes mutually understood exclusivity from personal expectations and institutional prescriptions.
An agent must know whose expectations apply before interpreting conduct or suggesting clarification.
Partner understandings
Records what participants understand their exclusivity commitment to cover.
Negotiated exclusivity boundaries
Capture explicit commitments, differences in understanding and unresolved boundaries without inferring agreement from a relationship label.
- Which romantic, sexual or other interactions do the participants explicitly include within their exclusivity commitment? definition
- What evidence establishes mutual agreement, and which boundaries remain unstated or disputed? provenance
Institutional prescriptions
Locates marital or relationship rules in their applicable context.
Rule versus lived arrangement
Record the authority, scope and date of an exclusivity rule separately from the conduct or agreements of people subject to it.
- Which legal, religious or customary source prescribes monogamy, for whom, and at what place and time? provenance
- Does that prescription regulate spouse count, sexual conduct or another boundary, and what does it leave unspecified? boundary
Partnerships through time Represents exclusivity as a time-bounded claim that can change across relationship transitions.
Counting lifetime partners without checking overlap can misclassify successive relationships.
Concurrency and succession
Distinguishes overlapping partnerships from a sequence of exclusive partnerships.
Frame-specific partner timeline
Record qualifying partnership intervals separately for each frame, preserving uncertain starts and endings.
- How many qualifying partnerships overlap during the assessment interval in each selected frame? measurement
- Which relationship-ending criterion is being used when separation, the end of intimacy and legal dissolution occur at different times? boundary
Duration and transitions
Handles changes in exclusivity and the limits of claims across time.
Bounded status and reclassification
Attach classifications to intervals and distinguish a revised agreement from conduct that departed from an existing agreement.
- Over what interval is monogamy supported, and are claims such as lifelong or serial justified by the available history? measurement
- What change in partnership, agreement or evidence would require the classification to be reassessed? action
Observation and comparative use Connects monogamy classifications to appropriate evidence in human and nonhuman settings.
Reports, social observations and parentage evidence answer different questions and should not be treated as interchangeable.
Human evidence
Separates relationship labels, participant reports and observations of conduct.
Claim and evidence fit
Associate each classification with evidence that addresses its particular exclusivity frame and interval.
- Is the classification based on self-description, a partner's account, an explicit agreement or observed conduct? provenance
- Which aspects of exclusivity remain unknown because the evidence does not cover them or accounts conflict? measurement
Nonhuman comparisons
Qualifies biological uses without importing human agreements or marriage rules.
Pairing, mating and parentage
Keep social pairing, observed mating and genetic parentage distinct, with an explicit observation unit and period.
- What observations or parentage analyses support the stated social, sexual or genetic sense of monogamy? provenance
- Does the evidence concern a pair, a breeding season, a sampled population or a broader species-level claim? boundary
Interpretation and permitted action Bounds the conclusions and interventions an agent can justify from a monogamy claim.
A relationship classification alone does not establish agreement compliance, relationship quality or authorization to investigate private conduct.
Agreement and conduct assessment
Assesses reported conduct against the agreement applicable at the time.
Qualified discrepancy assessment
Record possible departures from exclusivity only in relation to a stated boundary, relevant interval and sufficiently supported account.
- Which agreed boundary, if any, does the reported conduct appear to cross, and was that boundary in effect at the time? boundary
- What clarification is needed before describing the event as a breach of the participants' agreement? action
Privacy and inference limits
Limits collection of intimate information and unsupported conclusions about people or relationships.
Proportionate use of classification
Use the classification for the stated task while recording authorization for sensitive information and avoiding unsupported judgments about wellbeing, morality or health.
- What relationship or parentage information is necessary for the task, and what authorization governs its collection or disclosure? action
- Which proposed conclusions about trust, satisfaction, health or moral standing require evidence beyond a monogamy label? boundary
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- No sense is recorded: this description covers the human relationship concept and its biological mating-system uses.
- Monogamy is a subject studied across disciplines, not itself a discipline; the supplied domain classification should be checked.
- Terminology varies across fields, especially for social and genetic monogamy; research should specify the partners, observation period, and evidence required.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Marital monogamy
- Social monogamy
- Sexual monogamy
- Genetic monogamy
- Serial monogamy
- Lifelong monogamy
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Anthropology and sociology compare marriage arrangements, household organization, and partnership norms.
- Behavioral ecology studies pair bonds, parental care, and mating systems.
- Population genetics uses parentage evidence to distinguish genetic monogamy from social pairing.
- Demography examines successive unions and the duration of partnerships.
- Partners use explicit agreements to define expectations of exclusivity.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Inferring sexual or genetic exclusivity from marriage or an observed social pair bond.
- Treating a society's prescribed marriage norm as a description of every person's behavior.
- Classifying a species as uniformly monogamous despite variation among populations, individuals, or breeding periods.
- Failing to specify whether exclusivity applies to a breeding episode, a current partnership, or an entire lifetime.
- Assuming partners share the same definition of exclusivity without discussing it.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Marriage norms and institutions differ across societies; prescribed monogamy and actual partnership patterns must be distinguished.
- The acceptance of divorce and remarriage affects whether successive exclusive unions are treated as ordinary marital practice.
- In nonhuman animals, social pairing and reproductive exclusivity can vary geographically with ecological conditions.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Polygamy - In the marital sense, polygamy involves multiple spouses concurrently; monogamy involves one spouse at a time.
- Polyamory - Polyamory allows multiple romantic relationships with the knowledge and consent of those involved; romantic monogamy entails an exclusive partnership.
- Pair bonding - A pair bond is a sustained social attachment between two individuals and does not by itself establish sexual or genetic exclusivity.
- Celibacy - Celibacy concerns abstention from marriage or sexual activity, depending on usage; monogamy concerns the exclusivity of a partnership.
- Monogyny - Monogyny can describe a male having one female mate or a social-insect colony having one queen; neither usage alone establishes reciprocal partner exclusivity.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of monogamy this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
What the second pass must settle
- Does vr.tr.monogamy intentionally cover both human relationship concepts and biological classifications, or should one be primary with the other represented through a linked model?
- Which authoritative terminology sources should govern distinctions among marital, romantic, sexual, social and genetic monogamy?
- How should the model represent contested partnership start and end dates when legal status, participant understandings and observed conduct diverge?
- Which observation periods and sampling criteria justify population-level or species-level monogamy classifications in the research traditions being represented?
- Does an existing Vercy world model already own this concept or any of its senses, requiring linkage rather than a separate publication?