{ "model": { "rank": 5793, "code": "thing-q185816", "model_id": "vr.tr.analogy", "name": "analogy", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise an analogy, inspect the correspondences and transfers it proposes, judge their adequacy for a stated purpose, and decide whether to use, qualify, revise or reject it.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q185816/", "tier": 2, "score": 64, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "gravitoelectromagnetism", "analogical model" ], "aliasCount": 2, "merged": 2, "knownIn": 64, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q185816", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q185816", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T09:19:13Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "missingProviders": [ "Grok" ], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": null, "turns": null, "seconds": 14, "error": "Error: Internal error: {\n \"message\": \"API error (status 402 Payment Required): Grok Build usage balance exhausted\",\n \"http_status\": 402\n}", "retried": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 73, "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: 01a07b29-03ac-79d1-98cd-7dfe1e69722b\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: analogy\nRegistry id: vr.tr.analogy\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.MED\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA Vercy m" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q185816", "registryId": "vr.tr.analogy", "name": "analogy", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.MED" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q185816/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.analogy", "name": "analogy", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise an analogy, inspect the correspondences and transfers it proposes, judge their adequacy for a stated purpose, and decide whether to use, qualify, revise or reject it.", "definition": "", "scope_statement": "This model owns an analogy as a purpose-bound comparison between a source and a target, including its relational mapping, proposed transfers, relevant differences, evidential status and conditions of use.", "in_scope": [ "Identification of the source, target and comparison purpose", "Correspondences between entities, roles, relations and constraints", "Explanations, predictions or actions suggested by transferring a pattern", "Relevant similarities, disanalogies and limits of applicability", "Assessment, revision and communication of the analogy" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Complete descriptions of the source and target domains", "Independent evidence establishing claims about the target", "Deductive proofs and formal equivalence demonstrations", "Metaphorical expressions considered solely as linguistic or literary devices", "General similarity measures without a specified analogical mapping", "Implementation and outcomes of actions suggested by an analogy" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Two distinguishable subjects or representations can be identified, with a proposed correspondence between them; merely describing one through evocative language does not specify the mapping.", "The comparison connects roles or relations relevant to a purpose, rather than relying only on shared appearance or category membership.", "An agent can state what understanding or inference the correspondence is intended to support; an unexplained list of similarities is insufficient.", "Any conclusion transferred to the target remains distinguishable from a conclusion independently established about it.", "Differences and unmapped elements can remain without defeating the comparison; identity or complete equivalence is not required." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Source and target", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "References to the compared subjects or representations, with their source and target roles", "why_it_matters": "Prevents ambiguity about which knowledge is being used to interpret which subject." }, { "name": "Intended use", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explanation, hypothesis generation, prediction, design, persuasion or another explicitly stated use; multiple values allowed", "why_it_matters": "The adequacy required for teaching a pattern may differ from that required for choosing an intervention." }, { "name": "Mapped relational pattern", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Explicit correspondences between source and target entities, roles, relations and constraints", "why_it_matters": "Makes the grounds of the comparison inspectable." }, { "name": "Transfer direction", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Source to target, target to source, bidirectional or unspecified", "why_it_matters": "A correspondence usable in one direction does not automatically justify reverse transfer." }, { "name": "Proposed transfer", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Source-side pattern or claim linked to a target-side explanation, hypothesis, prediction or action proposal", "why_it_matters": "Separates what the analogy suggests from the similarities used to suggest it." }, { "name": "Transfer assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unassessed, awaiting target evidence, supported within stated conditions, challenged or rejected; assessed separately for each transfer", "why_it_matters": "Avoids treating every inference from the same analogy as equally warranted." }, { "name": "Critical disanalogies", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Source-target differences linked to the transfers they weaken or block", "why_it_matters": "Shows exactly where using the comparison may become misleading." }, { "name": "Applicability conditions", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explicit contextual, scale, temporal, causal or audience conditions; unknown conditions recorded as unknown", "why_it_matters": "Limits reuse to circumstances for which the mapping has been assessed." } ], "affordances": [ "Construct and inspect an explicit source-target mapping", "Generate target hypotheses while retaining their analogical origin", "Challenge proposed transfers using relevant disanalogies and target evidence", "Compare alternative analogies for the same target and purpose", "Revise the mapping or narrow its applicability when a transfer fails", "Communicate the analogy with its intended lesson, limits and verification needs" ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "comparison-frame", "name": "Comparison frame", "description": "Establishes what is being compared and what the comparison is intended to accomplish.", "rationale": "An analogy cannot be assessed without knowing its subjects, direction and intended use.", "layers": [ { "id": "source-target-framing", "name": "Source and target framing", "description": "Identifies the compared subjects at the level of detail actually used.", "findings": [ { "id": "identified-analogues", "name": "Identified analogues", "description": "Records the source and target representations, their boundaries and the origin of the comparison.", "questions": [ { "text": "What precisely are the source and target, and which aspects of each are included?", "kind": "definition", "id": "identified-analogues-q01" }, { "text": "Who or what introduced this comparison, and which descriptions of the source and target were used?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "identified-analogues-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "purpose-and-direction", "name": "Purpose and direction", "description": "States the intended contribution and the direction in which understanding is transferred.", "findings": [ { "id": "intended-analogical-use", "name": "Intended analogical use", "description": "Records the target question, intended audience and permitted direction of transfer.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which target question should this analogy help answer, and for whom?", "kind": "definition", "id": "intended-analogical-use-q01" }, { "text": "Is the comparison intended to explain, generate hypotheses, predict or guide action, and in which direction?", "kind": "action", "id": "intended-analogical-use-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "relational-mapping", "name": "Relational mapping", "description": "Makes explicit how the source pattern is aligned with the target.", "rationale": "Shared words or appearances can obscure whether the relations needed for the intended transfer actually correspond.", "layers": [ { "id": "role-correspondences", "name": "Role correspondences", "description": "Aligns participants and relations by their role in the comparison.", "findings": [ { "id": "explicit-correspondences", "name": "Explicit correspondences", "description": "Records paired entities, roles and relations without assuming that matched terms have identical meanings.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which source entities and relations correspond to which target entities and relations?", "kind": "definition", "id": "explicit-correspondences-q01" }, { "text": "Where does a proposed pairing depend only on a shared label or appearance rather than a relevant role?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "explicit-correspondences-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "pattern-coherence", "name": "Pattern coherence", "description": "Examines whether the correspondences preserve a usable connected pattern.", "findings": [ { "id": "preserved-relational-structure", "name": "Preserved relational structure", "description": "Records preserved dependencies and constraints, alongside mapping conflicts and omissions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which dependencies, ordering relations or constraints must survive the mapping for the intended lesson to hold?", "kind": "definition", "id": "preserved-relational-structure-q01" }, { "text": "Where do correspondences conflict, merge distinct roles or leave a necessary relation unmapped?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "preserved-relational-structure-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "analogical-transfer", "name": "Analogical transfer", "description": "Separates the mapped pattern from the claims or actions proposed for the target.", "rationale": "A coherent mapping does not by itself establish every conclusion that someone may draw from it.", "layers": [ { "id": "candidate-transfers", "name": "Candidate transfers", "description": "Identifies each proposed extension from source knowledge to target understanding.", "findings": [ { "id": "transfer-chain", "name": "Transfer chain", "description": "Links a source-side premise through specific correspondences to a proposed target-side conclusion.", "questions": [ { "text": "What exact explanation, hypothesis, prediction or action is being proposed for the target?", "kind": "definition", "id": "transfer-chain-q01" }, { "text": "Which source premise and mapped relations produce that proposal, and what additional assumptions does it require?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "transfer-chain-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "target-verification", "name": "Target verification", "description": "Records how proposed transfers have been or could be checked in the target.", "findings": [ { "id": "transfer-evidence-status", "name": "Transfer evidence status", "description": "Distinguishes analogy-generated expectations from independent observations or tests of the target.", "questions": [ { "text": "What target evidence supports or challenges each proposed transfer, and where can that evidence be inspected?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "transfer-evidence-status-q01" }, { "text": "What target observation or test would discriminate between the proposed transfer and a plausible alternative?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "transfer-evidence-status-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "disanalogies-and-limits", "name": "Disanalogies and limits", "description": "Locates differences and conditions that constrain the analogy's use.", "rationale": "A useful analogy needs a record of where its correspondences cease to support its proposed transfers.", "layers": [ { "id": "consequential-differences", "name": "Consequential differences", "description": "Assesses differences by their effect on particular transfers.", "findings": [ { "id": "transfer-breaking-disanalogies", "name": "Transfer-breaking disanalogies", "description": "Links differences in mechanism, agency, scale or constraints to the conclusions they undermine.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which source-target differences could change the outcome or invalidate the intended explanation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "transfer-breaking-disanalogies-q01" }, { "text": "For each consequential difference, which transfer must be withdrawn, qualified or tested further?", "kind": "action", "id": "transfer-breaking-disanalogies-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "applicability-envelope", "name": "Applicability envelope", "description": "States the circumstances in which the comparison remains usable.", "findings": [ { "id": "conditions-and-stop-signals", "name": "Conditions and stop signals", "description": "Records conditions of use and observable signs that the analogy has been extended too far.", "questions": [ { "text": "Under which contexts, scales, time horizons or assumptions is the mapping intended to apply?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "conditions-and-stop-signals-q01" }, { "text": "What change or observation should cause an agent to stop using this analogy for its stated purpose?", "kind": "action", "id": "conditions-and-stop-signals-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "selection-and-communication", "name": "Selection and communication", "description": "Supports choosing, revising and presenting an analogy for a particular use.", "rationale": "An analogy may support a limited insight while inviting unsupported extensions, so adoption and presentation require explicit judgment.", "layers": [ { "id": "alternative-analogies", "name": "Alternative analogies", "description": "Compares candidate source patterns against the same target question.", "findings": [ { "id": "comparative-fit", "name": "Comparative fit", "description": "Records what competing analogies reveal, omit or distort and the reason for selecting one.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which alternative source patterns address the same target question, and what relevant relations does each preserve or miss?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "comparative-fit-q01" }, { "text": "Should this analogy be retained, combined with a complementary analogy, narrowed or replaced for the intended use?", "kind": "action", "id": "comparative-fit-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "audience-interpretation", "name": "Audience interpretation", "description": "Controls how the analogy's intended lesson and limitations are conveyed.", "findings": [ { "id": "bounded-presentation", "name": "Bounded presentation", "description": "Records the source knowledge an audience needs and the unsupported transfers a presentation may invite.", "questions": [ { "text": "What must the audience understand about the source to follow the intended correspondences?", "kind": "definition", "id": "bounded-presentation-q01" }, { "text": "Which qualifications or explicit non-correspondences should accompany the analogy to prevent likely misinterpretations?", "kind": "action", "id": "bounded-presentation-q02" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Should the registry include comparisons based only on attributes within analogy, or require an explicit relational correspondence?", "How should analogy overlap with metaphor, simile and example models when one expression performs several functions?", "What minimum mapping and transfer detail is required for an analogy to be recognisable when its intended use is purely explanatory?", "Which assessment methods can compare analogical adequacy across purposes without implying a universal numerical strength score?", "When a mapping is substantially revised or its source is replaced, should it remain the same analogy or become a related new instance?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 10, "findings": 10, "questions": 20 } }, "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 analogy, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise an analogy, inspect the correspondences and transfers it proposes, judge their adequacy for a stated purpose, and decide whether to use, qualify, revise or reject it.", "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: gravitoelectromagnetism, analogical model.", "2 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 64 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 analogy, 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": [ "gravitoelectromagnetism", "analogical model" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 64 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 2 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 analogy from another, and a analogy 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 analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a analogy 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 analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 analogy is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a analogy, 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 analogy, 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 analogy 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 } } } }