{ "model": { "rank": 5153, "code": "thing-q188966", "model_id": "vr.tr.contract-bridge", "name": "contract bridge", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise contract bridge, assess a deal's auction, play and scoring state, and determine permitted actions under the applicable rules and information constraints.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q188966/", "tier": 2, "score": 69, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "Honeymoon Bridge", "duplicate bridge", "2/1 game forcing", "Little Major", "Singaporean bridge", "Romex", "systeme d'enchere française" ], "aliasCount": 7, "merged": 7, "knownIn": 69, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q188966", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q188966", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-09T21:46:59Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 23.2, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a08822-66a0-7b01-9bbb-75900a6028d3\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: contract bridge\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 005: 1001", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 68.4, "error": "Reading additional input from stdin...\nOpenAI Codex v0.153.4\n--------\nworkdir: R:\\02_PROJECTS\\02_Meta_Models_Platforms\\Ver.cy\\current\\thing-registry-backlog\nmodel: gpt-6-astra\nprovider: openai\napproval: never\nsandbox: read-only\nreasoning effort: none\nreasoning summaries: none\nsession id: 01a08822-669b-7491-9d0e-087ac64087a2\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: contract bridge\nRegistry id: vr.tr.contract-bridge\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q188966", "registryId": "vr.tr.contract-bridge", "name": "contract bridge", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q188966/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.contract-bridge", "name": "contract bridge", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise contract bridge, assess a deal's auction, play and scoring state, and determine permitted actions under the applicable rules and information constraints.", "definition": "Contract bridge is a trick-taking card game for four players in two fixed partnerships, using a standard 52-card deck, in which an auction determines a contract specifying a trump suit or no trumps and the number of tricks one partnership undertakes to win.", "scope_statement": "This model owns contract bridge as a four-player partnership trick-taking activity, including the auction, contract, trick play, scoring context and handling of irregularities; it distinguishes rubber and duplicate forms without treating either as the universal format.", "in_scope": [ "Four seats, two opposing partnerships, dealer and deal identity", "Auction calls, partnership agreements and determination of the final contract", "Declarer, dummy, defenders and the progression of thirteen tricks", "Vulnerability, contract outcome and format-dependent scoring", "Information entitlement, communication restrictions and irregularity resolution" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The general theory and classification of card games", "Manufacture, ownership and condition of physical cards and bridge equipment", "Organisational governance and tournament administration beyond rules affecting the current deal", "General probability theory, game theory and machine-learning methods", "Other bridge-family games, including auction bridge", "Player biographies, rankings and professional careers" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "An ordinary deal distributes a standard 52-card deck into four thirteen-card hands, with opposite seats forming fixed partnerships for that deal.", "The auction uses bids specifying a level from one to seven and a denomination, together with passes, doubles and redoubles; an established contract commits the declaring side to six plus the bid level in tricks.", "For a played contract, one member of the declaring partnership becomes declarer and the other becomes dummy, whose exposed hand is normally directed by declarer.", "Players must follow the led suit when able; a contract may name a trump suit or no trump.", "The result depends on the contracted commitment and its fulfilment, with vulnerability and doubling affecting scoring; scoring rules distinguish contract bridge from auction bridge." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Scoring format", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Rubber; duplicate; other explicitly identified contract-bridge format", "why_it_matters": "Determines how a deal contributes to games, rubbers, comparisons or a larger contest." }, { "name": "Governing rules", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Applicable laws edition, regulating authority and supplementary conditions", "why_it_matters": "Permitted procedures, disclosure duties and remedies require an identified authority." }, { "name": "Deal phase", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Preparation; auction; opening lead; play; claim or concession pending; scoring; completed; ruling pending", "why_it_matters": "Determines whose action is due and which actions can be taken." }, { "name": "Seat and partnership assignment", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "North-South and East-West, mapped to players, with dealer identified", "why_it_matters": "Establishes turn order, opposing sides and the attribution of calls and plays." }, { "name": "Vulnerability", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Neither side; North-South only; East-West only; both sides", "why_it_matters": "Changes relevant bonuses and undertrick penalties." }, { "name": "Auction history", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Ordered calls with caller, bid level and denomination where applicable, and any disputed or corrected calls", "why_it_matters": "Supports contract determination, declarer identification and legality checks." }, { "name": "Final contract", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unsettled; passed out; or level 1-7, clubs/diamonds/hearts/spades/no trump, undoubled/doubled/redoubled, declaring side and declarer", "why_it_matters": "Defines the trick target, trump status and scoring obligation." }, { "name": "Observer knowledge", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Observer-specific known cards, public actions, disclosed agreements, inferences and restricted information", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an agent from treating hidden or unauthorised information as usable player knowledge." }, { "name": "Tricks credited to declaring side", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "0-13 tricks, with played, agreed or adjudicated basis identified", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether the contract succeeds and the number of overtricks or undertricks." }, { "name": "Deal result", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Provisional or final score, scoring perspective, and played or adjusted status", "why_it_matters": "Separates the observed outcome from an official result that may reflect a ruling." } ], "affordances": [ "Identify the next player to act and enumerate legal calls or card plays from the applicable state.", "Derive the contract, declarer, dummy and opening leader from a completed valid auction.", "Evaluate possible actions using the acting player's permitted information and disclosed partnership methods.", "Track trick winners and assess progress towards making or defeating the contract.", "Calculate a deal score and its format-specific contribution to the wider result.", "Detect potential irregularities, preserve the relevant evidence and refer decisions requiring adjudication." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "deal-and-format", "name": "Deal and format", "description": "Establishes which contract-bridge activity is being played and the initial conditions of its deal.", "rationale": "The same auction and trick outcome can have different consequences under different scoring formats and vulnerability states.", "layers": [ { "id": "format-and-authority", "name": "Format and authority", "description": "Identifies the scoring format and the rules that govern this instance.", "findings": [ { "id": "applicable-bridge-rules", "name": "Applicable bridge rules", "description": "Record the format, laws edition and local conditions before judging procedure or assigning a result.", "questions": [ { "text": "Is this rubber bridge, duplicate bridge or another specified contract-bridge format?", "kind": "definition", "id": "applicable-bridge-rules-q01" }, { "text": "Which laws edition and supplementary conditions govern this deal?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "applicable-bridge-rules-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "deal-initialisation", "name": "Deal initialisation", "description": "Captures seats, partnerships, dealer, vulnerability and the validity of the initial distribution.", "findings": [ { "id": "initial-deal-conditions", "name": "Initial deal conditions", "description": "Distinguish the complete deal record from the subset any player is entitled to inspect.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who occupies each seat, which seat deals and which partnerships are vulnerable?", "kind": "definition", "id": "initial-deal-conditions-q01" }, { "text": "Does the deal contain each of the 52 distinct cards once, with thirteen cards assigned to each seat?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "initial-deal-conditions-q02" }, { "text": "Is vulnerability supplied by the duplicate board or determined by the applicable format's preceding results?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "initial-deal-conditions-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "auction-and-contract", "name": "Auction and contract", "description": "Models how calls establish the declaring side's commitment and the roles used during play.", "rationale": "A contract cannot be interpreted correctly without call order, denomination, doubling status and the history that identifies declarer.", "layers": [ { "id": "call-sequence", "name": "Call sequence", "description": "Tracks auction progression and the procedural status of each call.", "findings": [ { "id": "auction-legality-and-closure", "name": "Auction legality and closure", "description": "Assess bids, passes, doubles and redoubles against the preceding auction, keeping disputed calls distinct from accepted corrections.", "questions": [ { "text": "Whose turn is it, and which bids, passes, doubles or redoubles are legal after the recorded calls?", "kind": "action", "id": "auction-legality-and-closure-q01" }, { "text": "Has the auction ended with a contract, ended as passed out, or been interrupted by an irregularity?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "auction-legality-and-closure-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "contract-resolution", "name": "Contract resolution", "description": "Derives the final commitment and player roles from the completed auction.", "findings": [ { "id": "contract-and-declarer", "name": "Contract and declarer", "description": "Record the final bid and doubling status; identify declarer through the declaring partnership's first bid in the final denomination.", "questions": [ { "text": "What are the final level, denomination and doubling status, and how many tricks must the declaring side take?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "contract-and-declarer-q01" }, { "text": "Which player on the declaring side first bid the final denomination, and therefore who are declarer, dummy and opening leader?", "kind": "definition", "id": "contract-and-declarer-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "information-and-agreements", "name": "Information and agreements", "description": "Separates actual holdings, player knowledge, partnership meanings and permission to use information.", "rationale": "Bridge decisions depend on incomplete information and regulated partnership communication; access to a full deal must not imply permission to use it.", "layers": [ { "id": "partnership-methods", "name": "Partnership methods", "description": "Records agreed meanings of calls, leads and signals and their disclosure status.", "findings": [ { "id": "agreement-and-disclosure", "name": "Agreement and disclosure", "description": "Keep a partnership's agreement separate from a particular player's holding, intention or departure from that agreement.", "questions": [ { "text": "What agreed meaning applies to this bid, opening lead or defensive signal?", "kind": "definition", "id": "agreement-and-disclosure-q01" }, { "text": "What convention card, explanation or other evidence establishes that agreement?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "agreement-and-disclosure-q02" }, { "text": "What alert, announcement or explanation is required at this point under the applicable conditions?", "kind": "action", "id": "agreement-and-disclosure-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "knowledge-boundaries", "name": "Knowledge boundaries", "description": "Maintains a separate information perspective for each player and any reviewing agent.", "findings": [ { "id": "permitted-decision-evidence", "name": "Permitted decision evidence", "description": "Distinguish visible cards and lawful inferences from concealed holdings, later revelations and information subject to restrictions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which cards, calls, explanations and played cards are available to the acting player at this moment?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "permitted-decision-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Has a hesitation, unintended remark, exposed card or external message created information whose use requires restriction or a ruling?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "permitted-decision-evidence-q02" }, { "text": "Can the proposed action be assessed from the player's permitted information without using the complete deal?", "kind": "action", "id": "permitted-decision-evidence-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "trick-play-and-control", "name": "Trick play and control", "description": "Tracks legal card play, control of dummy and the accumulation or agreed allocation of tricks.", "rationale": "Bridge has distinct rules for following suit, winning tricks and directing dummy, while claims can resolve unplayed cards.", "layers": [ { "id": "card-play", "name": "Card play", "description": "Records opening lead, dummy exposure, turn order and completed tricks.", "findings": [ { "id": "legal-play-and-trick-winner", "name": "Legal play and trick winner", "description": "Determine available cards by the hand to play and the obligation to follow suit, then resolve the winner using the led suit and any trump cards.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which hand must play next, what suit was led and which cards can that hand legally play?", "kind": "action", "id": "legal-play-and-trick-winner-q01" }, { "text": "Which card wins the completed trick, and which hand therefore leads next?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "legal-play-and-trick-winner-q02" }, { "text": "Is the card being selected from declarer's own hand, dummy under declarer's direction or a defender's hand?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "legal-play-and-trick-winner-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "claims-and-completion", "name": "Claims and completion", "description": "Distinguishes tricks played out from tricks assigned following a claim, concession or ruling.", "findings": [ { "id": "remaining-trick-resolution", "name": "Remaining trick resolution", "description": "Preserve the position, stated line of play and responses when the remaining tricks are claimed or conceded.", "questions": [ { "text": "How many tricks have been completed, and what remaining tricks and line of play does the claim or concession specify?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "remaining-trick-resolution-q01" }, { "text": "Is the claim or concession accepted, contested or subject to further procedure under the governing rules?", "kind": "action", "id": "remaining-trick-resolution-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "scoring-and-adjudication", "name": "Scoring and adjudication", "description": "Converts the resolved deal into a score and records any authorised departure from the played result.", "rationale": "Contract fulfilment, vulnerability, format and rulings jointly determine the result an agent may report as official.", "layers": [ { "id": "score-calculation", "name": "Score calculation", "description": "Separates the deal's bridge score from its contribution to rubber or duplicate results.", "findings": [ { "id": "contract-outcome-and-score", "name": "Contract outcome and score", "description": "Calculate success, overtricks or undertricks and apply the scoring rules for the identified format.", "questions": [ { "text": "How many tricks did the declaring side receive relative to its target, and what score follows from the contract, doubling and vulnerability?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "contract-outcome-and-score-q01" }, { "text": "Does this score update a rubber account or feed a duplicate comparison such as matchpoints or IMPs?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "contract-outcome-and-score-q02" }, { "text": "Which partnership's perspective and which scoring unit does the reported number use?", "kind": "definition", "id": "contract-outcome-and-score-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "irregularities-and-rulings", "name": "Irregularities and rulings", "description": "Records procedural faults, decision authority and the status of remedies or adjusted scores.", "findings": [ { "id": "irregularity-resolution", "name": "Irregularity resolution", "description": "Preserve the timing and evidence of events such as a revoke, call out of turn, insufficient bid or misinformation before applying an authorised remedy.", "questions": [ { "text": "What irregularity is alleged, when was it discovered and what actions had already followed it?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "irregularity-resolution-q01" }, { "text": "Who is authorised to resolve it, and what should players do while a ruling is pending?", "kind": "action", "id": "irregularity-resolution-q02" }, { "text": "Is the recorded result the played score, a provisional result or an official adjusted score?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "irregularity-resolution-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "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": [ "The sense described is the partnership card game, inferred from the registered name.", "Governing documents are named from recall; their current editions and event-specific applicability require verification.", "Scoring depends on format: rubber totals, matchpoints and international match points are not interchangeable measures." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of contract bridge 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": [ "Rubber bridge", "Duplicate bridge", "Chicago bridge (four-deal bridge)" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of contract bridge this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "Laws of Duplicate Bridge, issued by the World Bridge Federation.", "World Bridge Federation regulations governing bidding systems, conventions and disclosure in its competitions.", "American Contract Bridge League regulations governing sanctioned play within its jurisdiction.", "European Bridge League regulations and conditions of contest for its competitions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of contract bridge 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": [ "Recreational partnership card play.", "Club and tournament competition in pairs and teams.", "International championships.", "Teaching probabilistic reasoning, inference and partnership coordination.", "Research on artificial intelligence and decision-making with incomplete information." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of contract bridge this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Cards in each player's initial hand", "typical_range": "13", "unit": "cards" }, { "quantity": "Tricks available in one deal", "typical_range": "13", "unit": "tricks" }, { "quantity": "Contract level", "typical_range": "1-7, requiring 7-13 tricks respectively", "unit": "tricks above six" }, { "quantity": "Hand strength under the conventional ace-king-queen-jack point count", "typical_range": "0-37 possible in one hand; 10 is the mean for a randomly dealt hand", "unit": "high-card points" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of contract bridge 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": [ "Partnership misunderstandings about bidding conventions, leads or defensive signals.", "Failure to disclose partnership agreements as required by the applicable competition rules.", "Use of unauthorized information, including information conveyed through a partner's hesitation or mannerisms.", "Procedural irregularities such as revokes, calls out of turn and leads out of turn.", "Collusion, illicit communication or access to concealed hands compromising competitive integrity." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of contract bridge 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": [ "Preferred bidding systems vary among countries and playing communities, including Standard American, Acol and strong-club systems.", "Permitted conventions and alerting procedures vary among governing organizations and competition levels.", "Terminology, teaching practices and club formats vary locally, while international duplicate play uses a shared laws framework." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of contract bridge 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": "Auction bridge", "difference": "In contract bridge, only tricks bid and made count toward game; auction bridge can credit unbid overtricks toward game." }, { "name": "Whist", "difference": "Traditional whist lacks contract bridge's competitive auction and exposed dummy hand." }, { "name": "Duplicate bridge", "difference": "A form of contract bridge in which results are compared across play of the same deals; it is a narrower format, not a separate underlying game." }, { "name": "Contract", "difference": "A bridge contract is the undertaking established by the auction; it is a component of the game rather than a legal agreement." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of contract bridge this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which laws editions and supplementary regulations should the first implementation support for rubber, duplicate and online play?", "How much detail about bidding systems, conventions and defensive carding belongs here versus in linked models of partnership methods?", "Which additional contract-bridge formats require explicit state beyond the rubber and duplicate distinctions represented here?", "How should contested claims, unauthorised-information cases and adjusted scores represent uncertainty while preserving the adjudicator's authority?", "Does the existing catalogue already contain a world model covering contract bridge that this registry entry should reference instead of receiving a separate publication?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 18, "questions": 34 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "abstract concept", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. 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 contract bridge, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise contract bridge, assess a deal's auction, play and scoring state, and determine permitted actions under the applicable rules and information constraints.", "characteristics": { "substance": "activity", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "observed and measured" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: Honeymoon Bridge, duplicate bridge, 2/1 game forcing, Little Major, Singaporean bridge, Romex, systeme d'enchere française.", "7 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 69 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 contract bridge, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "something that happens over time", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "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": [ "observe it, measure it, record its state" ], "howItIsRecognised": [ "Nothing to see. What is recognised is an instance of it, and which instances count is exactly what is argued about." ], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "Honeymoon Bridge", "duplicate bridge", "2/1 game forcing", "Little Major", "Singaporean bridge", "Romex", "systeme d'enchere française" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 69 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 7 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 contract bridge from another, and a contract bridge 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a contract bridge 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "process-and-outcome", "name": "Process, inputs and outcome", "description": "How a contract bridge proceeds, what it needs and what it leaves behind.", "rationale": "An activity is known by its steps and its results, and both have to be recordable while it is still running.", "layers": [ { "id": "steps-and-sequence", "name": "Steps and sequence", "description": "The steps of a contract bridge, their order and what may run in parallel.", "findings": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions", "name": "Steps, preconditions and completion", "description": "What has to be true before each step of a contract bridge and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a contract bridge, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about a step of a contract bridge, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once a step of a contract bridge is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-results", "name": "Inputs, resources and results", "description": "What a contract bridge consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a contract bridge takes and the results it leaves, wanted or not.", "questions": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the inputs and results of a contract bridge, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the inputs and results of a contract bridge, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "inputs-and-outputs-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the inputs and results of a contract bridge is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "definitions-in-contest", "name": "Definitions and who holds them", "description": "What contract bridge is taken to mean, and by whom.", "rationale": "When a field disagrees about a concept, the disagreement is the content. A model that picks one definition silently destroys the information.", "layers": [ { "id": "competing-definitions", "name": "Competing definitions", "description": "The main readings and the traditions behind them.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-map", "name": "Definitions and their holders", "description": "Each definition with the school or body that holds it.", "questions": [ { "id": "definition-map-q01", "text": "Which definitions of contract bridge are in use, and which tradition or body holds each?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "definition-map-q02", "text": "What turns on the difference between them in practice?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operationalisation", "name": "Operationalisation", "description": "How it is measured or applied when it has to be.", "findings": [ { "id": "operational-record", "name": "Measures and proxies", "description": "Instruments and indicators used to stand in for it.", "questions": [ { "id": "operational-record-q01", "text": "How is contract bridge operationalised or measured in practice, and by what instrument?", "kind": "measurement" }, { "id": "operational-record-q02", "text": "What does that operationalisation leave out, and when does that matter?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "instances-and-use", "name": "Instances, use and consequence", "description": "What counts as an instance of contract bridge and what follows from calling something that.", "rationale": "Applying a concept is an act with consequences, so a model must say what the label licenses and what it does not.", "layers": [ { "id": "instances", "name": "What counts as an instance", "description": "Clear cases, borderline cases and non-cases.", "findings": [ { "id": "instance-tests", "name": "Tests for an instance", "description": "What would settle whether something falls under it.", "questions": [ { "id": "instance-tests-q01", "text": "What would settle whether something is an instance of contract bridge?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "instance-tests-q02", "text": "Which borderline cases are argued about, and on what grounds?", "kind": "definition" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequence", "name": "Consequence of application", "description": "Rights, duties or decisions that follow from the label.", "findings": [ { "id": "consequence-record", "name": "What the label licenses", "description": "What an agent may do once something is classified this way.", "questions": [ { "id": "consequence-record-q01", "text": "What follows practically once something is treated as contract bridge?", "kind": "action" }, { "id": "consequence-record-q02", "text": "What must an agent not infer from the label alone?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a contract bridge 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 contract bridge and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 contract bridge is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a contract bridge, 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 contract bridge, 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 contract bridge 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 } } } }