loitering
Enable an agent to recognise and assess episodes described as loitering while distinguishing observed lingering from inferred purpose, social disapproval and any separately established legal classification.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
6 bundles · 11 layers · 16 findings · 26 questions
Lingering episode The temporal and spatial activity that a loitering designation attempts to describe.
Temporal continuity
Establishes observed duration, gaps and recurrence.
Bounded presence
Record the observed interval and distinguish continuous presence from separated sightings.
- When was presence first and last observed, and are the actual arrival and departure times known? measurement
- Which observation gaps prevent treating the presence as continuous? boundary
Spatial persistence
Determines what counts as staying in the same place despite local movement.
Local movement envelope
Describe the occupied area and movements before deciding whether the episode is lingering or passage.
- What area contains the observed standing, sitting, pacing or circulation? measurement
- What observed departure or change of destination would end this episode rather than extend it? boundary
Purpose and alternative interpretations Separates the activity's possible purposes from the observer's ability to recognise them.
Purpose evidence
Tracks what is known about why a participant remains.
Apparent versus stated purpose
Keep participant accounts, observed activity and inferred motives distinct; an undisclosed purpose remains unknown.
- Has the participant stated a purpose, and where does that account come from? provenance
- Which assertions about aimlessness or intent are interpretations rather than observations? boundary
Neighbouring activities
Tests whether another activity better explains the same presence.
Waiting, resting and socialising
Compare plausible activity descriptions without assuming that one episode must have only one purpose.
- What evidence supports waiting, resting, sheltering or socialising as an interpretation of this episode? definition
- Under the chosen definition, does an identified purpose exclude loitering, permit overlap or leave the designation disputed? boundary
Place and staying expectations Relates lingering to the uses and expectations of the particular setting.
Setting use
Describes the location's relationship to waiting, resting and passage.
Opportunities and reasons to stay
Record contextual explanations such as seating, queues, service delays and meeting points.
- What features or activities make remaining here an expected use of the place? definition
- What conditions during the episode, such as a delayed service or closed entrance, could explain prolonged presence? provenance
Staying expectations
Makes explicit whose expectations turn lingering into a disputed use of space.
Attributed expectation
Distinguish a documented site rule from an informal preference or an observer's assumption.
- Who says the participant should move on, and what stated expectation supports that position? provenance
- Is that expectation a site rule, an informal convention or an individual preference, and what remains unverified about its applicability? boundary
Designation and evidence Treats calling an episode loitering as an attributable classification that requires criteria.
Classification frame
Identifies the sense of loitering being applied.
Definition in use
Record whether the label belongs to ordinary speech, an operational research definition, a site policy or a separately verified legal framework.
- What definition and classification frame does this particular use of 'loitering' invoke? definition
- Which source establishes those criteria, and which criteria have actually been assessed? provenance
Evidence and contestation
Assesses support for the label and preserves alternative accounts.
Auditable designation
Tie the designation to observed conduct and preserve disagreements, missing context and potential inconsistency in its application.
- Which observations support the designation, and which contrary accounts or missing observations limit it? provenance
- Would the same recorded conduct receive the same designation if the participant's perceived identity or social status differed? boundary
Effects and response Connects the episode to demonstrated effects, justified responses and later reassessment.
Specific effects
Separates lingering from additional conduct and its consequences.
Presence versus interference
Record effects such as impeded passage independently of the loitering designation and distinguish them from reported unease.
- What specific effect on passage, access or other activities was observed, and how was it measured or documented? measurement
- Does the evidence establish a separate activity such as obstruction or harassment that requires its own model? boundary
Response and reassessment
Records the basis for action and how outcomes affect interpretation.
Evidence-linked response
Consider leaving the episode undisturbed, offering assistance or addressing a demonstrated effect; any restrictive response requires a separately established basis.
- What response, including no intervention, is supported by the observed effects, participant needs and the agent's established authority? action
- What new explanation or observed outcome would require revising the designation or ending the response? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Typical measurements
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of loitering this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Classifiers Filled
- Family
- Thing Registry
- Category
- Activities and processes
- Entry kind
- thing
- Plane
- ACT
- Domain
- ACT.ACT
What it is Filled
Loitering is remaining in or moving slowly about a place for a prolonged time without an immediately apparent purpose, a characterization that depends on context and does not by itself establish unlawful conduct.
In scope
- Episodes of lingering, including stationary presence and short movements within a bounded area
- Duration, recurrence, movement and interruptions of an episode
- Participants' stated purposes and observers' interpretations
- Place-specific expectations about staying, waiting and moving through
- Evidence and uncertainty supporting a loitering designation
- Responses to the episode and their observable consequences
Out of scope
- Public-space ownership, access rights and property administration as independent subjects
- Jurisdiction-specific offences, enforcement powers and legal proceedings
- Homelessness, employment status or other personal circumstances as classifications of people
- Stalking, harassment, trespass and obstruction as separately evidenced activities
- Organised assembly, protest and social gatherings as collective activities
- Loitering flight modes and loitering munitions
Why it exists Filled
Enable an agent to recognise and assess episodes described as loitering while distinguishing observed lingering from inferred purpose, social disapproval and any separately established legal classification.
Distinguishing features Filled
- The episode involves sustained or recurrent local presence; a single uninterrupted passage through the area does not meet this model's activity boundary.
- Lack of an apparent task is an observer's information state; a participant's explanation can support reclassification as waiting, resting or another activity.
- Movement does not automatically exclude loitering: pacing or circulating locally can preserve an episode of lingering.
- A loitering designation alone supplies no evidence of obstruction, intimidation, trespass or criminal intent; each requires separate observations and criteria.
- The same observed presence can receive different classifications under ordinary usage, site rules and legal definitions; the applicable frame must be recorded.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Label a person as loitering, and so suspicious, from their appearance, age or ethnicity.
- Track, photograph or identify people for lingering in a public place without legal basis.
- Order people to move on or use force against them.
- Present loitering as a crime where the local law does not make it one.
Only with a human decision
- Calling police or security about a person who is simply present in a place.
May
- Explain what loitering means and how laws on it differ between places.
- Report a person in visible distress or danger to the appropriate service.
Moral aspects Filled
- Loitering rules have long been used to target homeless people, young people and minorities.
- Being in public space without a stated purpose is ordinary human behaviour.
Who is affected
- Homeless people
- Young people
- Minority groups
Owners Filled
Steward
Nobody owns the behaviour; local authorities set the rules for public spaces.
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q24902509 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.loitering
- Wikidata: Q2380751 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2380751)
Direct properties not applicable Not applicable
- Episode duration: Seconds or minutes, with observation bounds and unknown start or end marked
- Local movement pattern: Stationary; pacing; circulating; departing and returning; mixed; unknown
- Presence area: Episode linked to a described place and explicit spatial boundary
- Purpose evidence: Participant-stated; directly observed activity; observer-inferred; conflicting; unavailable
- Reported purpose: Waiting; resting; socialising; sheltering; watching; other stated purpose; undisclosed; unknown
- Designation attribution: Loitering label linked to its speaker or institution, time, criteria and classification frame
- Interpretation state: Provisional; supported under recorded criteria; disputed; revised; unresolved
- Observed interference: None observed; passage impeded; access impeded; other specified effect; not assessed
- Observation coverage: Observed minutes and gap durations, with continuous or intermittent coverage indicated
Plane ACT: no invented physical properties.
Recognition not applicable Not applicable
Not applicable
Lingering can be observed, but the absence of purpose cannot be established from visual cues.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Construct a bounded account of lingering from observations while retaining gaps and uncertainty.
- Compare loitering, waiting, resting and socialising interpretations against available evidence.
- Attribute and compare competing loitering designations without treating one observer's label as fact.
- Identify what additional context would resolve an ambiguity and whether obtaining it is necessary and proportionate.
- Separate responses to demonstrated interference from responses based only on a loitering label.
- Revise or withdraw a designation when later evidence changes its basis.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Mistaking waiting or resting for suspicious behavior can lead to harassment or unjustified exclusion.
- Inferring intent from appearance or presence can reinforce discriminatory surveillance and enforcement.
- Treating lingering alone as evidence of danger can cause unnecessary confrontation.
Standards and interfaces not applicable Not applicable
Not applicable
No universal standard or legal classification applies to aimless lingering as such, since any legal classification depends on jurisdiction and additional circumstances.
Context of use required Filled
- Loitering is a description used for lingering in public or shared places without an immediately apparent purpose.
- It appears in discussions of public space, access and security, where observed behavior must be distinguished from assumptions about intention.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q2380751: loitering - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Loitering - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which reference definitions should anchor this registry entry, particularly on whether loitering requires aimlessness or merely an absence of apparent purpose?
- Should the entry explicitly include purposeful lingering, or represent it only as a contested extension of the term?
- What setting-specific operational criteria can distinguish lingering from ordinary passage without inventing a universal duration threshold?
- How should intermittent observations establish one recurring episode without encouraging unnecessary identification or tracking?
- Which empirical sources can establish how loitering designations vary with setting and perceived participant identity?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q2380751/spec.json