{ "model": { "rank": 6274, "code": "thing-q208704", "model_id": "vr.tr.flirting", "name": "flirting", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise possible flirting, record how participants interpret and respond to it, and judge appropriate next actions without treating inferred interest as consent.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q208704/", "tier": 2, "score": 61, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "footsies", "coquetry" ], "aliasCount": 2, "merged": 2, "knownIn": 61, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q208704", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q208704", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-07T13:33:22Z", "providers": [ "Codex", "Grok" ], "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": 0.03918314, "turns": 2, "seconds": 173.2, "error": null }, "codex": { "seconds": 73.1, "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: 01a07c10-29e4-7090-92e3-6465ae5a3ddb\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: flirting\nRegistry id: vr.tr.flirting\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA Vercy" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q208704", "registryId": "vr.tr.flirting", "name": "flirting", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q208704/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.flirting", "name": "flirting", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise possible flirting, record how participants interpret and respond to it, and judge appropriate next actions without treating inferred interest as consent.", "definition": "Flirting is a typically ambiguous class of verbal, nonverbal, and written courtship signals that communicate possible romantic or sexual interest while remaining deniable, so a signaller can test reciprocity and limit the social cost of an overt advance.", "scope_statement": "This model owns episodes of interaction interpreted or intended as playful romantic or sexual signalling, including their ambiguity, reciprocity, boundaries and development; it records attributed intentions separately from observable conduct.", "in_scope": [ "Candidate flirting episodes and the cues supporting or challenging that interpretation", "Participants' stated intentions and interpretations, including disagreements", "Directed compliments, teasing, innuendo and other potentially flirtatious exchanges in context", "Reciprocation, hesitation, redirection, withdrawal and repair within an episode", "Boundaries and contextual constraints on continuing or changing the interaction" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Attraction or desire as an enduring personal state", "Dating arrangements and the lifecycle of romantic relationships", "Sexual activity and consent to particular sexual acts", "Harassment complaints, investigations and remedies", "General friendship, politeness and customer-service interaction", "Stable personality traits or assessments of personal desirability" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Require evidence of a romantic or sexual reading beyond generic warmth; a smile or compliment alone leaves the classification unresolved.", "Distinguish flirtatious play from a direct romantic proposition by recording whether interest is suggested through playful or ambiguous cues or explicitly proposed; an episode can contain both.", "Distinguish reciprocal flirting from a one-sided attempt by identifying independently expressed uptake rather than counting continued presence or politeness as reciprocation.", "Distinguish personally directed flirting from scripted performance by checking the audience, role and available statements of intent; performance may still be interpreted as flirting.", "Record persistence after refusal or withdrawal as a boundary concern even if the initiator describes the conduct as flirting." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Episode interpretation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "possible flirting | participant-confirmed flirting | disputed interpretation | alternative interpretation | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Allows recognition without presenting an observer's inference as an established intention." }, { "name": "Attributed intention", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Participant linked to an intention claim, its claimant and its supporting evidence", "why_it_matters": "Separates what someone says they intend from what another person believes they intend." }, { "name": "Cue explicitness", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "indirect suggestion | explicit romantic interest | explicit sexual interest | mixed | unclear", "why_it_matters": "Shows what the exchange actually communicates and where interpretation remains necessary." }, { "name": "Reciprocity state", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "not yet assessed | affirmative uptake | ambiguous uptake | redirected | declined | withdrawn | disputed", "why_it_matters": "Supports decisions about whether to clarify, continue, change topic or stop." }, { "name": "Boundary expression", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Participant linked to a stated or observed limit, its scope, time and evidence", "why_it_matters": "Keeps permission to continue one kind of exchange separate from permission for another." }, { "name": "Interaction setting", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "private social | public social | workplace or institutional | commercial or performed | online | mixed", "why_it_matters": "Identifies contextual explanations and constraints relevant to interpreting flirtatious cues." }, { "name": "Freedom to disengage", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "no constraint identified | role or power constraint identified | practical constraint identified | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an agent from treating constrained participation as freely expressed interest." }, { "name": "Response interval", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Elapsed seconds, minutes or hours between identified turns, with channel and availability context", "why_it_matters": "Records timing without assigning a universal meaning to delayed replies." }, { "name": "Episode trajectory", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "opening | sustained exchange | clarification | proposed transition | cooling | closed | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Locates the current interaction and any proposed change requiring a fresh response." } ], "affordances": [ "Annotate a possible flirting episode with observable cues, competing explanations and participant accounts.", "Compare interpretations while preserving uncertainty about private intentions.", "Track reciprocity and boundary changes across turns.", "Suggest a low-pressure clarification when interest or comfort is unclear.", "Recommend continuing within expressed limits, redirecting, repairing or ending the exchange.", "Identify a proposed transition to a date, private channel or physical contact and route it to the relevant model without assuming permission." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikipedia-flirting", "title": "Flirting. Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flirting", "what_it_supports": "Working definition (also called coquetry); Kate Fox's fun-versus-intent split; Henningsen's six motives; covert versus overt signalling.", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "gersick-kurzban-2014", "title": "Covert Sexual Signaling: Human Flirtation and Implications for other Social Species. Andrew Gersick and Robert Kurzban, Evolutionary Psychology (SAGE), 2014", "url": "https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/147470491401200305", "what_it_supports": "Specialist definition of flirting as courtship signalling kept ambiguous to cut social costs; contrast with overt nonhuman courtship displays.", "url_status": "blocked" }, { "id": "hall-et-al-2010", "title": "Individual Differences in the Communication of Romantic Interest: Development of the Flirting Styles Inventory. Jeffrey A. Hall and colleagues, Communication Quarterly, 2010", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "The five styles people actually distinguish in research and self-report: traditional, physical, sincere, playful, and polite (N = 5,020)." }, { "id": "moore-2010", "title": "Human Nonverbal Courtship Behavior - A Brief Historical Review. Monica M. Moore, The Journal of Sex Research, 2010", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Observational catalogue of nonverbal solicitation (including Moore 1985: 52 female cues; approach often scored within 15 seconds); flirting as ethological courtship display." }, { "id": "mcdonald-routledge", "title": "Flirting. Lucy McDonald, in The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Sex and Sexuality", "url": "", "what_it_supports": "Push/pull account of flirting as a joint, deniable intimacy game; the test that harassment is not joint play and that flirting is not consent." }, { "id": "sciam-2013", "title": "Decoding the Art of Flirtation. Krystal D'Costa, Scientific American (Anthropology in Practice), 2013", "url": "https://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/anthropology-in-practice/decoding-the-art-of-flirtation/", "what_it_supports": "Hall styles in plain language; uncertainty as a design feature; reported misreading of friendliness as a sexual invitation (about two-thirds of respondents in the cited survey).", "url_status": "live" }, { "id": "nyt-1995-eibl", "title": "For Man and Beast, Language of Love Shares Many Traits. Natalie Angier, The New York Times, 14 February 1995", "url": "https://www.nytimes.com/1995/02/14/science/for-man-and-beast-language-of-love-shares-many-traits.html", "what_it_supports": "Eibl-Eibesfeldt's claim of a widely shared nonverbal flirting vocabulary (Samoa, Brazil, Paris, Sydney, New York) and Moore's solicitation taxonomy.", "url_status": "blocked" }, { "id": "eeoc-title-vii-via-practice", "title": "Flirting vs Harassment in the Workplace. Stone Rose Law (summary of U.S. Title VII / EEOC doctrine)", "url": "https://www.stoneroselaw.com/employment-lawyer/flirting-vs-harassment-in-the-workplace/", "what_it_supports": "Legal neighbour test: mutual, welcome social-sexual talk is not automatically unlawful; unwelcome conduct that is severe or pervasive, or tied to job consequences, is harassment.", "url_status": "live" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "flirtatious-meaning", "name": "Flirtatious meaning", "description": "What makes an exchange plausibly flirtatious and whose interpretation supports that reading.", "rationale": "Flirting cannot be recognised reliably by labelling isolated gestures without their context or competing meanings.", "layers": [ { "id": "candidate-signals", "name": "Candidate signals", "description": "Observable conduct that may suggest romantic or sexual interest.", "findings": [ { "id": "cue-and-alternative-reading", "name": "Cue and alternative reading", "description": "Record the actual words or conduct alongside reasons to read them as flirtation, friendliness, humour or role performance.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which specific words, gestures or combinations of cues support a romantic or sexual reading?", "kind": "definition", "id": "cue-and-alternative-reading-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence would favour ordinary friendliness, humour or a scripted role instead?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "cue-and-alternative-reading-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "participant-meanings", "name": "Participant meanings", "description": "Separate intended meaning, received meaning and outside interpretation.", "findings": [ { "id": "intention-interpretation-gap", "name": "Intention-interpretation gap", "description": "Preserve who attributes flirtatious intent to whom, including disagreement or an absence of direct testimony.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who described the exchange as flirting, and was that account direct, reported or inferred?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "intention-interpretation-gap-q01" }, { "text": "Which participants agree or disagree about whether romantic or sexual interest was being signalled?", "kind": "definition", "id": "intention-interpretation-gap-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "reciprocal-exchange", "name": "Reciprocal exchange", "description": "How flirtatious initiatives receive uptake, redirection or refusal over successive turns.", "rationale": "An attempted flirtation and a mutually welcomed exchange have different states and available next actions.", "layers": [ { "id": "initiative-and-uptake", "name": "Initiative and uptake", "description": "Connect a particular flirtatious move to the response it actually received.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-of-reciprocation", "name": "Evidence of reciprocation", "description": "Record affirmative engagement separately from courtesy, silence or merely remaining in the interaction.", "questions": [ { "text": "What response actively returns or welcomes the flirtatious meaning of the preceding move?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "evidence-of-reciprocation-q01" }, { "text": "Could the response instead reflect politeness, uncertainty or difficulty disengaging?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "evidence-of-reciprocation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "changes-in-engagement", "name": "Changes in engagement", "description": "Track whether participants maintain, soften, redirect or end flirtatious participation.", "findings": [ { "id": "uptake-over-time", "name": "Uptake over time", "description": "Preserve the sequence of responses so earlier enthusiasm does not override later hesitation or withdrawal.", "questions": [ { "text": "Where does the exchange show a change from affirmative uptake to ambiguity, redirection or refusal?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "uptake-over-time-q01" }, { "text": "Given the latest response, should the next move remain within the current tone, clarify, change topic or stop?", "kind": "action", "id": "uptake-over-time-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "setting-and-expression", "name": "Setting and expression", "description": "How the communication channel, audience and participant roles affect the meaning of flirtatious conduct.", "rationale": "The same phrase or gesture may carry different implications in a private chat, public performance or service encounter.", "layers": [ { "id": "channel-and-audience", "name": "Channel and audience", "description": "The expressive cues available and the people able to observe or receive the exchange.", "findings": [ { "id": "mediated-or-public-signalling", "name": "Mediated or public signalling", "description": "Record whether tone, gesture, emoji, timing or audience participation contributes to the interpretation, and which cues are unavailable.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which channel-specific cues support the interpretation, and which relevant cues cannot be observed?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "mediated-or-public-signalling-q01" }, { "text": "Is the apparent flirtation directed at a particular person, an audience or a fictional role?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "mediated-or-public-signalling-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "roles-and-local-conventions", "name": "Roles and local conventions", "description": "Contextual expectations that may explain apparently flirtatious behaviour.", "findings": [ { "id": "contextual-baseline", "name": "Contextual baseline", "description": "Record relevant role expectations or participant-provided conventions without assuming a universal flirting style.", "questions": [ { "text": "What known role expectations or participant-described conventions could explain this warmth, teasing or attention?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "contextual-baseline-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes personally directed interest from the interaction expected in this setting?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "contextual-baseline-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "welcome-and-boundaries", "name": "Welcome and boundaries", "description": "Whether the flirtatious exchange is welcome, within expressed limits and open to refusal.", "rationale": "Recognising flirtation does not establish that it is wanted or that a further action is permitted.", "layers": [ { "id": "scope-of-welcome", "name": "Scope of welcome", "description": "Limits on topic, intensity, channel, audience and contact.", "findings": [ { "id": "specific-and-current-limits", "name": "Specific and current limits", "description": "Record what a participant welcomes or declines at this point, without extending that response to other activities.", "questions": [ { "text": "What kinds of flirtatious exchange have been welcomed, limited or declined, and when?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "specific-and-current-limits-q01" }, { "text": "Would the proposed next move change sexual explicitness, privacy or physical contact beyond what has been welcomed?", "kind": "action", "id": "specific-and-current-limits-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "constraints-on-refusal", "name": "Constraints on refusal", "description": "Circumstances that may make disengagement difficult or continued pursuit inappropriate.", "findings": [ { "id": "ability-to-decline", "name": "Ability to decline", "description": "Record relevant authority, dependency, age-related safeguarding constraints or practical barriers to leaving, with unknowns left explicit.", "questions": [ { "text": "What known circumstances could make refusal costly, difficult or unsafe for a participant?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "ability-to-decline-q01" }, { "text": "Do those circumstances require ending pursuit, reducing pressure or applying a separate safeguarding assessment?", "kind": "action", "id": "ability-to-decline-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "development-and-repair", "name": "Development and repair", "description": "How a flirting episode continues, changes into another activity or recovers from a misread signal.", "rationale": "An agent needs to distinguish playful continuation from a proposed transition and recognise when repair or closure is appropriate.", "layers": [ { "id": "proposed-transitions", "name": "Proposed transitions", "description": "Moves from flirtatious exchange toward explicit invitations or other forms of interaction.", "findings": [ { "id": "transition-without-assumed-permission", "name": "Transition without assumed permission", "description": "Identify the proposed next activity and its response separately from the flirting that preceded it.", "questions": [ { "text": "Has someone proposed a date, a private conversation, physical contact or another distinct activity?", "kind": "definition", "id": "transition-without-assumed-permission-q01" }, { "text": "What explicit clarification or response is needed before acting on that proposal?", "kind": "action", "id": "transition-without-assumed-permission-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "misreading-and-closure", "name": "Misreading and closure", "description": "Acknowledgement of unwanted or misunderstood flirtation and evidence that pursuit has ended.", "findings": [ { "id": "repair-and-respected-ending", "name": "Repair and respected ending", "description": "Record corrections, apologies, topic changes and cessation without requiring the other participant to reassure or reciprocate.", "questions": [ { "text": "What interpretation or boundary was corrected, and how did the initiator respond?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "repair-and-respected-ending-q01" }, { "text": "What next action would acknowledge the correction and respect closure without renewing pressure?", "kind": "action", "id": "repair-and-respected-ending-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds", "name": "Kinds and varieties", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Playful or recreational flirting (fun or self-esteem, no further intent)", "Courtship-initiating flirting (aimed at sex or a romantic relationship)", "Physical flirting (touch, proximity, and other sexualised nonverbal cues)", "Sincere or bonding-oriented flirting (interest shown by seeking an emotional connection)", "Traditional gender-role flirting (men expected to initiate; women to signal receptivity)", "Polite or low-intensity flirting (manners-constrained and easily missed or denied)", "Mediated or digital flirting (text, dating apps, social media)", "Instrumental flirting (used as a means to a non-romantic end, including workplace advantage)" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Library of Congress Thesaurus for Graphic Materials (TGM)", "value_or_pattern": "tgm002662", "note": "Main heading is Courtship; Flirtation, Courting, and Wooing are used-for terms, not a separate TGM class." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (United States), enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission: unwelcome sexual conduct that is severe or pervasive, or that is linked to job benefits or detriment, is harassment, not protected social interaction.", "Equality Act 2010 (United Kingdom): unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that violates dignity or creates a hostile environment is harassment; welcome mutual flirting is not, by itself, a prohibited act.", "Code du travail, article L. 1153-1 (France): sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual or sex-based conduct that violates dignity; labour courts separate it from drague by consent, repetition, and pressure.", "National labour and personality-protection duties on employers (e.g. Swiss Code of Obligations practice): employers must stop unwelcome sexual behaviour even where a prior flirt was claimed." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-real-world-use", "name": "Real-world use", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Courtship openings in bars, clubs, campuses, and parties, often as brief nonverbal solicitations (glance, smile, hair-touch, lean) that invite approach.", "First-meeting talk among strangers and on early dates: compliments, teasing, reciprocal disclosure, and testing whether interest is returned.", "Texting and dating-app chat used to signal interest before or instead of an in-person meeting.", "Customer-facing work in hospitality and nightlife, where playful sexualised talk may be part of the service script.", "Offices and other organisations, where the same cues are treated as optional social play by some parties and as risk or harassment by others." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Short darting glance at a target (Moore observational coding)", "typical_range": "2-3", "unit": "seconds" }, { "quantity": "Gaze fixate on a target (Moore observational coding)", "typical_range": "more than 3", "unit": "seconds" }, { "quantity": "Room-encompassing glance before selecting a target", "typical_range": "5-10", "unit": "seconds" }, { "quantity": "Female nonverbal solicitation types catalogued in Moore 1985", "typical_range": "52", "unit": "behaviour types" }, { "quantity": "Self-reported experience of friendliness being read as a sexual invitation (survey cited in Scientific American 2013)", "typical_range": "about 67", "unit": "percent of respondents" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards", "name": "Failure modes and hazards", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Sexual overperception: affiliation or manners read as sexual invitation, especially in cross-sex encounters.", "Unwanted persistence: one-sided signalling that is not a joint game and becomes harassment.", "Power-asymmetric 'flirting' (supervisor, teacher, clinician) that the other party cannot freely decline.", "Treating flirting as consent to later sexual contact.", "Cultural or contextual misread of gaze, touch, or compliment, producing offence or false confidence.", "Escalation from rejected advance to stalking, coercion, or assault.", "Workplace, platform, or professional-licence sanctions when the conduct is unwelcome or recorded." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-regional-variation", "name": "Regional variation", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ "Some nonverbal cues (coy smile, gaze-and-look-away, neck presentation) have been reported as widely shared; display rules for who may initiate, how direct one may be, and whether touch is allowed still differ by culture and generation.", "British openers often use an impersonal comment (classically the weather) rather than a personal compliment; U.S. dating scripts more often treat talking to several possible partners at once as normal.", "French ordinary language (drague) leans toward pursuit; English flirting more readily includes non-committal play; Russian has a large verb set that splits courtship (e.g. ухаживать) from flirting (e.g. заигрывать).", "Greeting kisses or hugs that are unmarked in some countries can be coded as hostile-environment conduct under U.S. employment law.", "Text-first flirting (sometimes called flirtext in Australian reporting) is more expected in some youth dating cultures than in others." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-neighbours", "name": "Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart", "description": "Reported by the breadth pass; each item needs checking against its source before it becomes normative.", "evidence": [ { "name": "courtship", "difference": "Courtship is the longer mate-seeking process (often toward a recognised relationship). Flirting is an early, deniable signalling tactic that can occur inside courtship or as play with no such process." }, { "name": "seduction", "difference": "Seduction is directed at obtaining sexual or romantic capture. Flirting can stop at testing, play, or affiliation and need not pursue a conquest." }, { "name": "sexual harassment", "difference": "Harassment is unwelcome sexual or sex-based conduct, typically not a joint game, and in employment law often severe, pervasive, or tied to power. Reciprocal, welcome, freely exit-able signalling is flirting on that legal test." }, { "name": "friendliness / affiliation", "difference": "Affiliation has no romantic or sexual probe. The separator is whether a courtship-relevant, deniable interest signal is being sent or tested (a question receivers often get wrong)." }, { "name": "banter / teasing", "difference": "Banter is verbal play as such. It is flirting only when used as a courtship or sexual-interest signal (McDonald's push of not-yet-earned intimacy)." }, { "name": "consent", "difference": "Consent is agreement to a specific later act. Flirting does not, by itself, authorise sexual contact." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of flirting this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Should flirting require intended romantic or sexual signalling, or also include playful exchanges that participants call flirting while denying attraction?", "What evidence standards can distinguish affirmative reciprocation from courtesy across different channels and participant-described conventions?", "How should episode boundaries be defined when flirtatious exchanges recur intermittently across platforms or long intervals?", "How should this model represent fictional, performed or AI-mediated flirting without attributing human intentions to a role or system?", "Which observations should trigger a handoff to harassment or safeguarding models, and how should disputed accounts remain represented?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 18, "questions": 28 } }, "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 flirting, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to recognise possible flirting, record how participants interpret and respond to it, and judge appropriate next actions without treating inferred interest as consent.", "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: footsies, coquetry.", "2 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 61 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 flirting, 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": [ "footsies", "coquetry" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 61 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 flirting from another, and a flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a flirting 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 flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting 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 flirting?", "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 flirting?", "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 flirting 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 flirting and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 flirting is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a flirting, 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 flirting, 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 flirting 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 } } } }