{ "model": { "rank": 6815, "code": "thing-q816264", "model_id": "vr.tr.formal-science", "name": "formal science", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise formal science, assess how its claims are justified, and determine when its methods and results can be used.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "INF", "domain": "INF.KNW", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q816264/", "tier": 2, "score": 58, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "theoretical sciences", "computer applications" ], "aliasCount": 2, "merged": 2, "knownIn": 58, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q816264", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q816264", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-09T23:33:44Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 18, "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: 01a08884-4b25-7563-885d-445c052a23c9\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: formal science\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.KNW\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 007: 1001 ", "usd": 0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 58.6, "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: 01a08884-4b33-7aa0-8e01-29b998bf0b4d\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: formal science\nRegistry id: vr.tr.formal-science\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (no" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q816264", "registryId": "vr.tr.formal-science", "name": "formal science", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q816264/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.formal-science", "name": "formal science", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise formal science, assess how its claims are justified, and determine when its methods and results can be used.", "definition": "Formal science is an umbrella category of disciplines that investigate abstract structures and the consequences of explicitly stated rules or assumptions, chiefly through deductive reasoning rather than empirical testing.", "scope_statement": "This model owns formal science as a family of disciplines concerned with formally specified structures, relations and consequences, including its methods of justification and convention-dependent disciplinary boundaries.", "in_scope": [ "Subject matter expressed through abstract structures, formal languages and explicit assumptions", "Deductive, constructive and computational methods of establishing formal claims", "Relationships between syntax, semantics, proof and interpretation", "Disciplinary membership and boundaries under named classification conventions", "Conditions governing the transfer of formal results into applications" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Individual formal systems, theories and proofs as independently modelled knowledge objects", "Empirical disciplines and their observation-based claims about the world", "Individual researchers, research organisations and professional roles", "Publications, curricula and software implementations as separate artifacts", "Philosophical positions about abstract existence considered independently of their methodological consequences" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A claim's formal justification depends on specified assumptions and permitted reasoning steps; observations alone do not establish its deductive validity.", "Its subject matter includes abstract structures and their consequences, rather than requiring a particular physical referent.", "Using equations or statistics does not by itself make a discipline formal science; the model must identify what warrants its central claims.", "A formal result can remain valid under its assumptions even when an intended real-world application fails to satisfy them.", "Formal science denotes a disciplinary family, rather than a single formal language, axiomatic theory or collection of practitioners." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Disciplinary inclusion convention", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named classification or institutional convention, version, and included, excluded or disputed status", "why_it_matters": "Membership cannot be inferred reliably from a discipline's name or use of mathematical notation." }, { "name": "Primary formal subject matter", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Structures; logical consequence; computation; quantitative relations; other explicitly described abstract objects", "why_it_matters": "Identifies what the discipline investigates and distinguishes neighbouring specialisations." }, { "name": "Justification methods", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Deductive proof; constructive derivation; exhaustive verification; machine-assisted proof; exploratory computation; other specified method", "why_it_matters": "Separates methods that establish claims from methods that suggest conjectures or supply partial evidence." }, { "name": "Foundational commitments", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to adopted logics, axioms, semantic assumptions and permitted constructions", "why_it_matters": "Results and acceptable arguments may depend on commitments that differ across formal traditions." }, { "name": "Claim assessment vocabulary", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Conjectured; proved under stated assumptions; refuted; independent relative to a specified theory; unresolved; disputed", "why_it_matters": "Lets an agent record epistemic status without treating all formal statements as established theorems." }, { "name": "Connection to empirical interpretation", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Uninterpreted formal study; specified interpretation; application with explicit validation requirements", "why_it_matters": "Marks where deductive justification ends and evidence about an application becomes necessary." }, { "name": "Institutional and classification placement", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Sourced links to classification entries, societies, journals, degree programmes and defining reference works", "why_it_matters": "Documents recognised disciplinary placement without equating the field with its institutions or literature." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify a candidate discipline or research activity under an explicitly named understanding of formal science.", "Identify the assumptions and reasoning standards needed to assess a formal claim.", "Distinguish a proof, conjecture, computational observation and empirically supported application.", "Determine whether a result can transfer between formal settings by checking assumptions and interpretation.", "Route unresolved claims to proof checking, counterexample search, foundational analysis or empirical validation.", "Compare disciplinary classifications while preserving disagreements about membership." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "disciplinary-identity-and-boundaries", "name": "Disciplinary identity and boundaries", "description": "Recognises formal science through its subject matter and standards of justification while recording classification-dependent membership.", "rationale": "Formal science is easily confused with any quantitatively expressed research or with one of its constituent disciplines.", "layers": [ { "id": "formal-subject-matter", "name": "Formal subject matter", "description": "Identifies the abstract objects and relations a candidate field studies.", "findings": [ { "id": "objects-and-consequences", "name": "Objects and consequences", "description": "Record whether the central questions concern formally specified objects and what follows from their definitions and assumptions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which structures, relations or formal processes constitute the field's primary subject matter?", "kind": "definition", "id": "objects-and-consequences-q01" }, { "text": "Does the work investigate formal consequences, empirical behaviour, or an explicitly distinguished combination?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "objects-and-consequences-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "membership-conventions", "name": "Membership conventions", "description": "Makes the convention behind disciplinary inclusion explicit.", "findings": [ { "id": "convention-dependent-inclusion", "name": "Convention-dependent inclusion", "description": "Record which branches are included, excluded or disputed by a named source rather than presenting one boundary as universal.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which source or classification defines the intended extension of formal science?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "convention-dependent-inclusion-q01" }, { "text": "How does that convention distinguish formal branches of computing or statistics from their empirical and applied branches?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "convention-dependent-inclusion-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "formal-expression-and-foundations", "name": "Formal expression and foundations", "description": "Captures the kinds of explicit commitments that make formal questions and derivations assessable.", "rationale": "An agent cannot assess formal reasoning from notation alone; it must identify the rules and assumptions giving the notation force.", "layers": [ { "id": "languages-and-semantics", "name": "Languages and semantics", "description": "Distinguishes permitted expressions from their interpretation.", "findings": [ { "id": "syntax-and-interpretation", "name": "Syntax and interpretation", "description": "Record how the field specifies expressions and meanings, including where informal exposition relies on recoverable formal conventions.", "questions": [ { "text": "What determines whether an expression or construction is well formed?", "kind": "definition", "id": "syntax-and-interpretation-q01" }, { "text": "Which interpretations give its statements meaning, and which questions concern syntax alone?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "syntax-and-interpretation-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "assumptions-and-logics", "name": "Assumptions and logics", "description": "Identifies foundational choices that condition accepted results.", "findings": [ { "id": "explicit-foundational-dependencies", "name": "Explicit foundational dependencies", "description": "Record adopted axioms, inference rules and restrictions on constructions without assuming a single foundation across formal science.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which axioms, logic and construction principles are presupposed by the reasoning being assessed?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "explicit-foundational-dependencies-q01" }, { "text": "Which conclusions require reassessment if those commitments change?", "kind": "action", "id": "explicit-foundational-dependencies-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "justification-and-claim-status", "name": "Justification and claim status", "description": "Distinguishes established formal consequences from conjectures, partial evidence and unresolved foundational questions.", "rationale": "Formal presentation and computational success can obscure whether a claim has actually been established.", "layers": [ { "id": "proof-and-verification", "name": "Proof and verification", "description": "Records accepted ways to establish a claim and the dependencies of checking it.", "findings": [ { "id": "warrant-for-formal-claims", "name": "Warrant for formal claims", "description": "Identify the argument or verification procedure, its coverage and any trusted computational components.", "questions": [ { "text": "What accepted proof or verification standard warrants the claim under its stated assumptions?", "kind": "definition", "id": "warrant-for-formal-claims-q01" }, { "text": "What must an agent inspect or rerun to check the argument, including any trusted software components?", "kind": "action", "id": "warrant-for-formal-claims-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "exploration-and-limits", "name": "Exploration and limits", "description": "Separates suggestive evidence, decisive counterexamples and established limits of derivation.", "findings": [ { "id": "status-and-coverage", "name": "Status and coverage", "description": "Record whether evidence covers the claim's full domain and distinguish lack of a proof from an established limitation relative to a specified system.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the available computation exhaust a justified finite domain, exhibit a counterexample, or merely sample cases?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "status-and-coverage-q01" }, { "text": "Is the claim unresolved, refuted, proved, or shown independent of a specified theory, and what supports that status?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "status-and-coverage-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretation-and-result-transfer", "name": "Interpretation and result transfer", "description": "Governs movement of formal results between theories and into applications.", "rationale": "A valid derivation does not automatically justify a translated theorem or a claim about an external system.", "layers": [ { "id": "transfer-between-formal-settings", "name": "Transfer between formal settings", "description": "Examines whether a translation preserves what a result requires.", "findings": [ { "id": "preserved-assumptions-and-properties", "name": "Preserved assumptions and properties", "description": "Record mappings between settings and the assumptions or properties necessary for a valid transfer.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which definitions, assumptions and relevant properties does the proposed mapping preserve?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "preserved-assumptions-and-properties-q01" }, { "text": "What additional argument is needed before the result may be asserted in the target setting?", "kind": "action", "id": "preserved-assumptions-and-properties-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "empirical-application", "name": "Empirical application", "description": "Separates formal validity from adequacy of a real-world interpretation.", "findings": [ { "id": "application-bridge", "name": "Application bridge", "description": "Record how formal objects correspond to external entities and which application assumptions require evidence.", "questions": [ { "text": "How are formal variables, relations and constraints connected to observable or operational features of the application?", "kind": "definition", "id": "application-bridge-q01" }, { "text": "Which assumptions require empirical validation before the formal conclusion can support action in that application?", "kind": "action", "id": "application-bridge-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-and-disciplinary-evidence", "name": "Classification and disciplinary evidence", "description": "Documents how reference systems and institutions identify the disciplinary family and its constituent fields.", "rationale": "Formal science needs traceable placement, especially where classification systems organise its branches separately.", "layers": [ { "id": "classification-crosswalks", "name": "Classification crosswalks", "description": "Records sourced placements without inventing a single universal classification code.", "findings": [ { "id": "scheme-specific-placement", "name": "Scheme-specific placement", "description": "Distinguish a classification entry for the umbrella concept from entries for constituent disciplines.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which verified entries in named schemes classify formal science itself, and which classify only constituent fields?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "scheme-specific-placement-q01" }, { "text": "Where do the schemes differ in coverage, hierarchy or treatment of interdisciplinary branches?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "scheme-specific-placement-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutional-recognition", "name": "Institutional recognition", "description": "Uses disciplinary institutions and reference works as evidence of scope and practice.", "findings": [ { "id": "markers-and-their-coverage", "name": "Markers and their coverage", "description": "Record what journals, societies, curricula and defining works actually represent, including whether they address the umbrella or a branch.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which defining reference works or institutional statements explicitly describe formal science and its methods?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "markers-and-their-coverage-q01" }, { "text": "Does each institutional marker support recognition of the whole family or only a particular constituent discipline?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "markers-and-their-coverage-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-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "The boundary of formal science is conventional; inclusion of statistics, information theory and other adjacent fields should be checked against the classification being used.", "The listed identifier schemes classify constituent subjects and do not supply a single identifier for formal science.", "This description is based on recall; no sources or current classification editions were consulted." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of formal science 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": [ "Mathematics", "Formal logic", "Theoretical computer science" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of formal science this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Mathematics Subject Classification (MSC)", "value_or_pattern": "Two-digit subject classes with finer alphanumeric subdivisions", "note": "Maintained jointly by Mathematical Reviews and zbMATH; classifies mathematical subjects, not formal science as a whole." }, { "scheme": "ACM Computing Classification System (CCS)", "value_or_pattern": "Hierarchical subject categories", "note": "Published by the Association for Computing Machinery; covers computing, including its theoretical foundations, rather than the entire formal-science category." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of formal science 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": [ "Proving properties of algorithms and establishing computational limits.", "Verifying software and hardware against formal specifications.", "Developing mathematical structures used in scientific and engineering models.", "Establishing logical foundations for reasoning and proof.", "Providing mathematical foundations for cryptography." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of formal science 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": [ "A proof may contain an invalid inference or depend on an unstated assumption.", "An inconsistent axiom system permits every statement to be derived under classical logic.", "A formally correct result may be applied to a real-world situation that does not satisfy its assumptions.", "A verified implementation may satisfy a specification that fails to express the intended requirement.", "Undecidability and incompleteness constrain what particular formal systems and general decision procedures can establish." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of formal science 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": [ "Universities and classification systems differ in whether they group mathematics, logic and theoretical computer science under a shared formal-science heading." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of formal science 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": "Natural science", "difference": "Natural science tests claims about the natural world using observation and experiment; formal science establishes consequences within abstract frameworks." }, { "name": "Mathematics", "difference": "Mathematics is a principal constituent discipline; formal science is a broader grouping that also includes formal logic and commonly theoretical computer science." }, { "name": "Computer science", "difference": "Its theoretical foundations overlap formal science, while its experimental, engineering and human-centred branches extend beyond it." }, { "name": "Statistics", "difference": "Mathematical statistics studies formal properties of inference procedures, while applied statistics also depends on empirical data and substantive modelling assumptions." }, { "name": "Formal methods", "difference": "Formal methods are techniques for specifying and verifying systems, especially computational systems; formal science names a grouping of disciplines." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of formal science this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which authoritative definition and disciplinary inclusion convention should govern this registry entry?", "How should the chosen convention handle statistics, theoretical computer science and other fields combining formal and empirical work?", "Which current classification schemes explicitly represent formal science as an umbrella, and what verified crosswalks are available?", "Which sources adequately describe variation in proof standards and foundational commitments across its constituent disciplines?", "Does the existing Vercy catalogue already contain a world model covering this disciplinary family, requiring this registry entry to link to it?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 27 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "discipline or field of knowledge", "method": "Written from the archetype playbook - what this kind of thing needs beyond identity and provenance - and from the structure that recurred across 6,333 models already researched by two engines. Applied to this entry by rule. No source was read for this thing and no claim here is researched. This entry carries no facets of its own, so they were inferred from its domain - a guess about a whole domain applied to one thing.", "facetsInferred": true, "nextPass": "A researcher replaces this draft with a sourced specification. Treat every sentence below as a proposal to argue with.", "purpose": "Give an agent a durable, checkable way to recognise a formal science, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an agent to recognise formal science, assess how its claims are justified, and determine when its methods and results can be used.", "characteristics": { "substance": "information", "origin": "conceptual", "agency": "inert" }, "whatYouCanDoWithIt": [ "read and interpreted" ], "distinguishingFeatures": [ "Names folded into this entry, which a task may need to split apart again: theoretical sciences, computer applications.", "2 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 58 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 formal science, and on what evidence are they told apart?" ], "whatItIsMadeOf": "content that has to be carried by something else", "physicalCharacter": [ "Does nothing on its own; everything it does, something else did to it.", "These come from the domain this entry sits in rather than from the entry itself, so treat them as a first guess about the whole domain applied to one thing." ], "whatCanBeDoneWithIt": [ "read it and act on what it says" ], "howItIsRecognised": [], "relatedModels": [ { "relation": "covers", "note": "Finer kinds folded into this entry because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it. Each is a model waiting to be split out when one does.", "targets": [ "theoretical sciences", "computer applications" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 58 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 formal science from another, and a formal science 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 formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science 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 formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science 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 formal science between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a formal science 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 formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "content-and-access", "name": "Content, encoding and access", "description": "What a formal science says, how it is encoded and who may read it.", "rationale": "An informational thing carries content that can be copied, versioned and withheld, none of which its physical carrier explains.", "layers": [ { "id": "content-and-encoding", "name": "Content and encoding", "description": "The content itself, its format and its language.", "findings": [ { "id": "content-and-format", "name": "Content, format and language", "description": "What a formal science contains and in what form it is held.", "questions": [ { "id": "content-and-format-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the content of a formal science, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about the content of a formal science, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "content-and-format-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once the content of a formal science is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "access-and-rights", "name": "Access, rights and retention", "description": "Who may read, copy or change it, and for how long it is kept.", "findings": [ { "id": "access-rules", "name": "Access rules and retention", "description": "The permissions attached to a formal science and the period it survives.", "questions": [ { "id": "access-rules-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes access to a formal science, and in what units or vocabulary?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "identifiers", "types and classes", "values with units", "explicit unknowns" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q02", "text": "Who or what asserted this about access to a formal science, by which method, and when was it true?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "authority", "method", "evidence", "event time", "knowledge time" ] }, { "id": "access-rules-q03", "text": "What may an agent decide or do once access to a formal science is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "subject-and-method", "name": "Subject matter and method", "description": "What formal science studies and how it establishes anything.", "rationale": "A field is identified by its questions and its methods, and those are what distinguish it from the fields next to it.", "layers": [ { "id": "subject", "name": "Subject matter", "description": "The questions it takes as its own.", "findings": [ { "id": "subject-record", "name": "Questions and objects of study", "description": "What it is about, stated so a neighbouring field can be told apart.", "questions": [ { "id": "subject-record-q01", "text": "What questions and objects does formal science take as its own?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "subject-record-q02", "text": "Which questions does it share with a neighbouring field, and who claims them?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "method", "name": "Method and evidence", "description": "How claims are established and what counts as evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "method-record", "name": "Methods and standards of evidence", "description": "The methods used and what they are taken to establish.", "questions": [ { "id": "method-record-q01", "text": "By what methods does formal science establish claims, and what counts as sufficient evidence?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "method-record-q02", "text": "What kind of claim can this field not settle, and where should an agent look instead?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "institutions-and-classification", "name": "Institutions and classification", "description": "Where formal science is practised and how catalogues place it.", "rationale": "The institutional footprint is the evidence that a field exists as a field rather than as a topic.", "layers": [ { "id": "institutions", "name": "Institutional markers", "description": "Societies, journals, degrees and departments.", "findings": [ { "id": "institution-record", "name": "Bodies and venues", "description": "Where the field organises itself.", "questions": [ { "id": "institution-record-q01", "text": "Which societies, journals or degrees mark formal science as an established field?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "institution-record-q02", "text": "What would show that it is emerging or dissolving rather than established?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification", "name": "Classification schemes", "description": "Where library and research classifications put it.", "findings": [ { "id": "classification-record", "name": "Codes and their disagreements", "description": "The classification codes that place it, and where they differ.", "questions": [ { "id": "classification-record-q01", "text": "Which classification schemes place formal science, under what codes?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "classification-record-q02", "text": "Where do those schemes disagree about its scope?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a formal science 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 formal science and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 formal science is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a formal science, 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 formal science, 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 formal science 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 } } } }