irregular warfare
Enable an agent to recognise and assess proposed instances of irregular warfare, preserve competing interpretations, and identify appropriate analytical, protective, and accountability actions.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
6 bundles · 11 layers · 17 findings · 27 questions
Definitions and boundaries Represent the competing meanings of irregular warfare and test their application to specific cases.
Definition provenance
Record who defines the concept, when, and for what analytical or institutional purpose.
Attributed definition
An assessment should identify its chosen definition and any relevant alternatives.
- Which institution or author supplies the definition, and what dated text establishes its wording? provenance
- Does this definition require armed violence, indirect methods, a population-centred contest, or another condition? definition
Classification tests
Apply inclusion and exclusion criteria at an explicit scale.
Bounded case classification
Test the case against neighbouring concepts without treating them as interchangeable.
- What evidence distinguishes this case from conventional warfare with unequal forces or isolated irregular tactics? boundary
- Does the classification apply to the whole conflict, a campaign, one actor's activity, or a particular episode? boundary
Political contest and populations Examine the authority being contested and the different experiences of affected populations.
Authority and objectives
Distinguish political aims, claims to legitimacy, and observed governing practices.
Contested political order
Record which arrangements actors seek to preserve, replace, weaken, or influence.
- What political authority or arrangement does each actor seek to change or defend? definition
- Which objectives are publicly stated, and which are inferred from independently documented behaviour? provenance
Population experience
Record variation in consent, coercion, accommodation, and access to governance.
Support and compliance
Assess population relationships without equating silence, participation, or compliance with support.
- What evidence distinguishes voluntary support from coercion, survival strategies, or lack of alternatives? measurement
- How do experiences differ across communities, locations, and periods, and whose accounts are missing? measurement
Actors and conflict configuration Represent participating actors, disputed relationships, and the coexistence of different forms of warfare.
Actor relationships
Assess organisational autonomy, external involvement, and changing alignments.
Command, support, and autonomy
Distinguish demonstrated control from assistance, alignment, or allegations of sponsorship.
- Which command and support relationships are corroborated, and which remain allegations? provenance
- What evidence shows whether a supported armed group acts autonomously or under another actor's direction? boundary
Forms and transitions
Track how irregular activity relates to conventional operations and neighbouring conflict concepts.
Mixed conflict character
Represent coexistence and change without forcing a single permanent classification.
- Which documented activities support an irregular classification, and how do they relate to conventional operations? boundary
- What dated changes in organisation, objectives, or activity warrant reassessing the classification? measurement
Evidence and outcomes Evaluate contested reporting and assess outcomes beyond military activity counts.
Contested information
Assess claims made under conditions of restricted access and political competition.
Claim corroboration
Keep claims about control, support, and success separate from the evidence available to verify them.
- Which claims rely on participant reporting, and what independent corroboration exists? provenance
- How do restricted access, intimidation, or selective reporting affect what can be observed? measurement
Political and social outcomes
Assess changes in authority, security, and population experience against explicit objectives.
Outcome versus activity
Distinguish recorded activity from durable political or protective effects.
- What evidence indicates lasting changes in authority, perceived legitimacy, or civilian security rather than temporary military presence? measurement
- Which alternative explanations challenge the claim that a particular campaign caused those changes? measurement
Protection and response constraints Connect the assessment to civilian protection, legal review, and accountable analytical action.
Civilian consequences
Record harm and exposure without assigning collective responsibility to populations.
Harm and vulnerability
Assess documented civilian consequences and uncertainty about attribution.
- What civilian deaths, injuries, displacement, coercion, or service disruption are documented, with what coverage and uncertainty? measurement
- What protective or humanitarian referral is justified by the evidence, and could disclosing identifying information expose people to retaliation? action
Legal and decision boundaries
Separate analytical terminology from legal findings and authority to act.
Classification and authority to act
Require separate grounds for legal conclusions and proposed interventions.
- Which questions about conflict classification, individual status, or applicable obligations require qualified legal assessment? boundary
- What evidence, mandate, and review are needed before an agent recommends a response affecting people or institutions? 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 irregular warfare this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of irregular warfare this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Standards and regulation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of irregular warfare 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 irregular warfare 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 irregular warfare 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 irregular warfare 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 irregular warfare 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
Irregular warfare is warfare in which at least one participating combatant force is an irregular military force rather than a regular armed force.
In scope
- Classification considers evidence that at least one participating combatant force is an irregular military force.
- Analysis considers political objectives and contests over authority, legitimacy, influence and control.
- Analysis considers relations among state forces, non-state armed groups, external supporters and affected populations.
- Analysis considers relationships among irregular forces, conventional operations and wider political campaigns.
- Assessment considers evidence of conflict evolution, civilian consequences and constraints on proposed responses.
Out of scope
- Detailed targeting, weapons employment, sabotage, or operational attack planning
- Complete models of insurgency, counterinsurgency, terrorism, or unconventional warfare as separate concepts
- Full organisational models of participating states, armed forces, and armed groups
- Complete histories of individual wars or campaigns
- Authoritative legal determinations of conflict classification, individual status, or criminal responsibility
Why it exists Filled
Enable an agent to recognise and assess proposed instances of irregular warfare, preserve competing interpretations, and identify appropriate analytical, protective, and accountability actions.
Distinguishing features Filled
- Classification requires evidence that at least one participating combatant force is irregular; non-state affiliation alone does not establish that status.
- Indirect approaches or contests over political authority, influence or population relationships do not establish this classification without an irregular military participant.
- Distinguish irregular warfare from asymmetry: unequal capabilities alone do not establish the proposed classification.
- Distinguish the wider conflict or campaign from particular tactics: a terrorist act, ambush, or deception does not by itself classify the whole conflict.
- Allow irregular and conventional activity to coexist; classification must specify the actors, location, period, and level of analysis to which it applies.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Assist in planning, conducting or supporting any armed operation or attack.
- Help recruit fighters or spread propaganda for armed groups.
- Help target civilians or civilian infrastructure.
- Present atrocities as legitimate tactics.
Only with a human decision
- Publishing analysis of ongoing conflicts.
May
- Explain the contested concept of irregular warfare and its history, citing scholarly sources.
- Describe the laws of armed conflict that apply to it.
Moral aspects Filled
- Irregular conflicts often kill and displace civilians.
- Labelling groups can legitimize or delegitimize them.
Who is affected
- Civilians in conflict areas
- Displaced people
- Combatants
Owners Filled
Steward
Nobody owns the concept; states and international law govern conduct of war.
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q68482296 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.irregular-warfare
- Wikidata: Q6073630 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6073630)
Direct properties not applicable Not applicable
- Definition adopted: Attributed definition linked to its issuing institution or author, version, date, and source
- Classification assessment: Candidate | supported under selected definition | contested | unsupported | insufficient evidence
- Unit of analysis: Conflict | campaign | actor activity | episode, with geographic and temporal bounds
- Political objective: Stated and inferred objectives concerning authority, governance, influence, autonomy, or displacement of an opponent
- Actor and support relationships: Attributed links of command, sponsorship, cooperation, rivalry, dependence, and civilian interaction
- Population relationship: Reported consent, coercion, accommodation, resistance, mixed experience, or unknown; differentiated by group and locality
- Relationship to conventional warfare: Predominantly irregular | concurrent with conventional operations | changing over time | disputed | unknown
- Civilian harm evidence: Source-specific counts or ranges of deaths, injuries, displacement, and service disruption, with period and coverage
- Assessment confidence: Qualitative confidence with evidence coverage, corroboration, contradictions, and access limitations
Plane ACT: no invented physical properties.
Recognition not applicable Not applicable
Not applicable
Irregular warfare is an analytical category that cannot be reliably identified from clothing, equipment or any other visual cue alone.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Compare how competing definitions classify a bounded case.
- Map attributed actor relationships and contested claims to authority.
- Separate observed behaviour, actor claims, and analyst interpretations.
- Track changes in conflict character and population experience over time.
- Identify evidence gaps, civilian protection concerns, and questions requiring qualified legal review.
- Produce an auditable assessment explaining why a classification is supported, contested, or unresolved.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Violence involving irregular forces can expose civilians to death, injury, displacement and loss of essential services.
- Uncertain affiliation and fragmented command can increase misidentification and weaken accountability for abuses.
- Coercion and intimidation can undermine civilian autonomy and access to humanitarian assistance.
- Overbroad use of the category can stigmatize communities or obscure distinctions between civilians and combatants.
Standards and interfaces required Filled
- Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, treaties of international humanitarian law adopted by states.
Context of use required Filled
- Irregular warfare is discussed in military history, security analysis and the study of conflicts involving irregular armed groups.
- The term helps examine conflicts in which political influence, relationships with populations and asymmetric methods shape military activity.
- Its meaning varies across institutions, so analyses need to state the definition being used.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q6073630: irregular warfare - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Irregular warfare - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which institutional and scholarly definitions should anchor this model, and where do their inclusion criteria materially disagree?
- How should the model treat coercive political activity below the threshold of armed conflict when a selected definition includes it?
- What evidence is sufficient to establish that indirect political contestation is central to a campaign rather than incidental to conventional warfare?
- Which measures of legitimacy, influence, and control remain credible where respondents face coercion and researchers have restricted access?
- Does the existing Vercy catalogue already contain a world model covering this concept that should serve as its single source of truth?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q6073630/spec.json