{ "model": { "rank": 964, "code": "thing-q8683", "model_id": "vr.tr.cold-war", "name": "Cold War", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify the Cold War as a historically bounded system of rivalry, assess its changing configuration and escalation risks, and determine which interpretations or responses the recorded evidence supports.", "family": "Thing Registry", "category": "Activities and processes", "status": "research-draft", "kind": "thing", "plane": "ACT", "domain": "ACT.ACT", "industry": "", "version": "", "url": "/models/thing/q8683/", "tier": 2, "score": 210, "payload": { "layer": "wikidata", "aliases": [ "Cold War in Asia" ], "aliasCount": 1, "merged": 1, "knownIn": 210, "facets": null, "markers": [], "lexicalClass": "", "senseRank": null, "alsoRegisteredAs": null, "source": { "dataset": "wikidata", "item": "Q8683", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q8683", "license": "CC0 1.0" } }, "research": { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-06T21:53:50Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "missingProviders": [ "Grok" ], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "usd": null, "turns": null, "seconds": 2.3, "error": "Error: Internal error: {\n \"message\": \"API error (status 402 Payment Required): Grok Build usage balance exhausted\",\n \"http_status\": 402\n}", "retried": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 74, "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: 01a078b5-838e-7693-9058-b79f9a3fb4da\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: Cold War\nRegistry id: vr.tr.cold-war\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\nA Vercy" } } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q8683", "registryId": "vr.tr.cold-war", "name": "Cold War", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q8683/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.cold-war", "name": "Cold War", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify the Cold War as a historically bounded system of rivalry, assess its changing configuration and escalation risks, and determine which interpretations or responses the recorded evidence supports.", "definition": "", "scope_statement": "This model owns the Cold War's system-level configuration, competing alignments, modes of confrontation, restraints on escalation, and historical transitions; whether the registry intends the specific historical Cold War or a reusable class of cold wars remains to be confirmed.", "in_scope": [ "Competing power centres, their alignments, and the limits of bloc cohesion", "Connections among military, ideological, economic, technological, and intelligence competition", "Relationships between the overarching rivalry and particular regional conflicts", "Nuclear deterrence, crisis escalation, communication, and negotiated restraint", "Evidence for period boundaries, changes in rivalry, and its termination" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Full operational histories of individual wars, campaigns, or military units", "Complete institutional models of states, alliances, and international organisations", "Technical specifications and operating procedures for weapons systems", "Complete biographies of leaders, diplomats, and intelligence personnel", "Standalone models of ideologies, economic systems, or political regimes", "Post-Cold War developments without an explicit relationship to the rivalry" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Test whether the referent is the named historical Cold War or merely a later rivalry described by analogy; shared rhetoric alone does not establish identity.", "Test for sustained rivalry across several arenas rather than a single diplomatic dispute, arms race, or regional war.", "Distinguish avoidance of sustained direct war between principal rivals from absence of warfare: regional fighting and indirect intervention must remain visible.", "Test whether a regional conflict's connection to the wider rivalry is evidenced rather than inferred solely from its dates or participants.", "Distinguish temporary accommodation within continuing rivalry from a change that dismantles the rivalry's organising relationships." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Referent type", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named historical Cold War | generic rivalry type | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether the agent is describing one historical phenomenon or classifying multiple instances." }, { "name": "Temporal boundary", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Candidate start and end dates or intervals, each with a criterion and uncertainty", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an assumed chronology from silently deciding which events belong." }, { "name": "Principal rivalry configuration", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Time-qualified relationships among principal rivals, allies, partners, and non-aligned actors", "why_it_matters": "Makes changes in alignment and autonomy visible without treating blocs as single actors." }, { "name": "Arena-specific competitive intensity", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Restrained | active | acute | unknown, assessed separately by arena and interval", "why_it_matters": "Allows diplomatic accommodation and intensified competition elsewhere to coexist." }, { "name": "Direct hostilities between principal rivals", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "None evidenced | isolated encounter | limited hostilities | sustained war | disputed", "why_it_matters": "Tests the boundary between cold rivalry and direct war without erasing exceptional encounters." }, { "name": "Regional conflict linkage", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Diplomatic backing | finance | arms supply | advisory support | operational involvement | disputed linkage", "why_it_matters": "Separates documented involvement from blanket classification of conflicts as proxies." }, { "name": "Perceived deterrence stability", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Stable | strained | acute concern | contested | unknown, attributed to an actor and date", "why_it_matters": "Keeps contemporary perceptions distinct from retrospective judgments of actual danger." }, { "name": "Restraint mechanism status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed | agreed | operating | impaired | suspended | ended | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes the existence of an agreement or communication channel from its practical operation." }, { "name": "Historical interpretation", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Claim linked to its author, evidence, time of assessment, competing accounts, and confidence", "why_it_matters": "Supports judgments about causation and turning points without presenting disputed interpretations as settled facts." } ], "affordances": [ "Assess whether an event belongs to the Cold War and explain the strength and limits of that classification.", "Compare phases of rivalry across arenas without forcing them onto a single intensity scale.", "Trace alignment changes, external intervention, and local agency through time.", "Reconstruct crisis decision points using information available to actors at the time.", "Evaluate historically available options for restraint against recorded commitments, capabilities, and communication channels.", "Identify conflicting interpretations and specify the evidence needed to resolve or narrow them." ] }, "sources": [], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "rivalry-and-alignment", "name": "Rivalry and alignment", "description": "The actors and relationships that make the Cold War a connected international rivalry.", "rationale": "The model must recognise the organising rivalry while preserving divisions within blocs and the agency of actors outside them.", "layers": [ { "id": "principal-antagonism", "name": "Principal antagonism", "description": "The identity, stakes, and perceived incompatibilities of the central rivalry.", "findings": [ { "id": "organising-rivalry", "name": "Organising rivalry", "description": "Record which antagonistic relationships organise the Cold War in a given interval and what participants believe is at stake.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which actors constitute the principal rivalry during this interval, and what makes their antagonism system-defining?", "kind": "definition", "id": "organising-rivalry-q01" }, { "text": "Which contemporary records establish their stated objectives, threat perceptions, and perceived incompatibilities?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "organising-rivalry-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "bloc-cohesion-and-autonomy", "name": "Bloc cohesion and autonomy", "description": "Formal alignment, practical cooperation, internal divisions, and independent positioning.", "findings": [ { "id": "alignment-without-assumed-control", "name": "Alignment without assumed control", "description": "Record alliance ties and dependence separately from obedience, shared ideology, or agreement on particular actions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Where do formal membership, material dependence, ideological affinity, and actual policy cooperation diverge?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "alignment-without-assumed-control-q01" }, { "text": "When should an actor be treated as an autonomous participant, a non-aligned actor, or a rival within an apparent bloc?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "alignment-without-assumed-control-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "arenas-of-systemic-competition", "name": "Arenas of systemic competition", "description": "The means through which rivals seek security, influence, legitimacy, and strategic advantage.", "rationale": "Cold War competition cannot be recognised or assessed through military confrontation alone.", "layers": [ { "id": "ideology-and-legitimacy", "name": "Ideology and legitimacy", "description": "Competing claims about political order and efforts to shape audiences' beliefs.", "findings": [ { "id": "legitimacy-contests", "name": "Legitimacy contests", "description": "Record ideological claims, intended audiences, channels of influence, and evidence of reception.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which claims about political or social order are being contested, and which audiences are targeted?", "kind": "definition", "id": "legitimacy-contests-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes an influence campaign's intended effect from its observed reception?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "legitimacy-contests-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "economic-and-technological-leverage", "name": "Economic and technological leverage", "description": "Competition through resources, development offers, trade restrictions, and technological achievement.", "findings": [ { "id": "resources-as-rivalry-instruments", "name": "Resources as rivalry instruments", "description": "Record when economic or technological activities serve strategic competition and how recipients respond.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence connects a particular aid programme, restriction, or technological programme to Cold War objectives?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "resources-as-rivalry-instruments-q01" }, { "text": "Which changes in dependence, access, capability, or prestige can be observed without assuming that expenditure produced influence?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "resources-as-rivalry-instruments-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "intelligence-and-covert-competition", "name": "Intelligence and covert competition", "description": "Hidden information gathering and intervention, including the limits of attribution.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-covert-involvement", "name": "Attributed covert involvement", "description": "Record alleged and established covert involvement separately, with the evidence and disclosure history supporting each attribution.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which records substantiate sponsorship, authorisation, participation, and intended purpose rather than merely alleging involvement?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-covert-involvement-q01" }, { "text": "What may the agent conclude or compare when attribution remains disputed or relevant archives remain inaccessible?", "kind": "action", "id": "attributed-covert-involvement-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "regional-conflict-and-local-agency", "name": "Regional conflict and local agency", "description": "How local struggles connect to the wider rivalry without becoming reducible to it.", "rationale": "The model must explain indirect confrontation while avoiding the assumption that external sponsors originate or control every regional conflict.", "layers": [ { "id": "conflict-linkage", "name": "Conflict linkage", "description": "The mechanisms connecting a particular conflict to Cold War competition.", "findings": [ { "id": "qualified-proxy-relationship", "name": "Qualified proxy relationship", "description": "Record the type, timing, and extent of outside involvement before applying a proxy-war interpretation.", "questions": [ { "text": "What assistance or intervention connects this conflict to the principal rivalry, and during which intervals?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "qualified-proxy-relationship-q01" }, { "text": "Does the evidence support a proxy relationship, direct intervention, opportunistic support, or a weaker association?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "qualified-proxy-relationship-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "local-objectives-and-feedback", "name": "Local objectives and feedback", "description": "Local goals, bargaining power, and the effects of regional events on principal rivals.", "findings": [ { "id": "sponsor-partner-divergence", "name": "Sponsor-partner divergence", "description": "Record where local actors pursue independent objectives or alter the choices available to external supporters.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which local objectives predate, exceed, or contradict the objectives of external supporters?", "kind": "definition", "id": "sponsor-partner-divergence-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence shows local actors redirecting assistance, resisting sponsor pressure, or drawing sponsors further into confrontation?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "sponsor-partner-divergence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "deterrence-crises-and-restraint", "name": "Deterrence, crises, and restraint", "description": "The relationship between military threats, perceived vulnerability, escalation, and mechanisms for limiting confrontation.", "rationale": "A cold rivalry requires explicit treatment of how direct war is threatened, avoided, or approached; absence of war alone cannot establish successful deterrence.", "layers": [ { "id": "deterrence-posture", "name": "Deterrence posture", "description": "Capabilities, commitments, and beliefs relevant to discouraging attack or coercion.", "findings": [ { "id": "capability-credibility-and-perception", "name": "Capability, credibility, and perception", "description": "Record military capability separately from communicated threats and an opponent's assessment of their credibility.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which capabilities and commitments underpin deterrence claims, and how are they understood by the opposing actors?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "capability-credibility-and-perception-q01" }, { "text": "Which sources distinguish contemporary beliefs about vulnerability from later reconstructions of the military balance?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "capability-credibility-and-perception-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "crisis-control", "name": "Crisis control", "description": "Decision points at which confrontation may intensify or be contained.", "findings": [ { "id": "escalation-and-off-ramps", "name": "Escalation and off-ramps", "description": "Record crisis triggers, signals, misperceptions, decision constraints, and available routes to restraint.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which developments change the risk of direct or nuclear war, and what did each decision-maker know at that point?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "escalation-and-off-ramps-q01" }, { "text": "Which communication channels, reciprocal steps, agreements, or concessions were available to reduce escalation, and under what conditions?", "kind": "action", "id": "escalation-and-off-ramps-q02" }, { "text": "What evidence supports attributing restraint to deterrence, diplomacy, operational limits, or other causes?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "escalation-and-off-ramps-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "historical-boundaries-and-transformation", "name": "Historical boundaries and transformation", "description": "The criteria for the Cold War's emergence, changing phases, and ending.", "rationale": "The agent needs defensible boundaries and transition criteria to avoid treating a familiar date range or a single narrative as the phenomenon itself.", "layers": [ { "id": "onset-and-periodisation", "name": "Onset and periodisation", "description": "Alternative starting criteria and evidence for changes within the rivalry.", "findings": [ { "id": "criterion-based-phases", "name": "Criterion-based phases", "description": "Record candidate onset dates and phases alongside the relationships or behaviours that justify them.", "questions": [ { "text": "What change marks the emergence of the Cold War under each proposed starting criterion?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "criterion-based-phases-q01" }, { "text": "Which indicators distinguish intensified confrontation, accommodation, and renewed rivalry, including differences among regions and arenas?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "criterion-based-phases-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "termination-and-continuity", "name": "Termination and continuity", "description": "The disappearance or transformation of organising antagonisms and the persistence of their effects.", "findings": [ { "id": "ending-versus-persistent-effects", "name": "Ending versus persistent effects", "description": "Record competing termination criteria and distinguish continued rivalry from institutions, conflicts, or dependencies that outlast it.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which relationships or practices must cease or change for the Cold War to count as ended, and when is each criterion met?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "ending-versus-persistent-effects-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes a continuing Cold War relationship from a later consequence or a newly constituted rivalry?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "ending-versus-persistent-effects-q02" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does vr.tr.cold-war denote the specific historical Cold War, a general class of rivalry, or both, and does an existing world model already own that referent?", "Which onset and termination criteria should anchor the model, and how should competing regional chronologies be represented?", "What evidentiary threshold justifies describing a regional conflict as a proxy war without obscuring local agency?", "How can escalation risk and deterrence effects be assessed when contemporary perceptions, available capabilities, and retrospective evidence disagree?", "Which non-aligned, smaller-state, and local perspectives are necessary to test a framework initially organised around principal rivals?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 11, "findings": 11, "questions": 23 } }, "draft": { "generator": "vr.draft.v3", "status": "draft-generated", "researched": false, "archetype": "event or period", "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 Cold War, record what state it is in, and decide what may be done with it.", "whatItIs": "Enable an AI agent to identify the Cold War as a historically bounded system of rivalry, assess its changing configuration and escalation risks, and determine which interpretations or responses the recorded evidence supports.", "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: Cold War in Asia.", "1 finer distinctions are held as aliases rather than separate entries, because telling them apart needs a task that asks for it.", "Described in 210 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 Cold War, 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": [ "Not a thing to see. Recognised by when it happened and who was involved, on the account of somebody." ], "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": [ "Cold War in Asia" ] } ], "standing": "Described in 210 Wikipedia languages, which measures how widely it is written about rather than how important or how common it is. 1 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 Cold War from another, and a Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War from the things most often confused with it.", "questions": [ { "id": "distinguishing-features-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes what distinguishes a Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War 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 Cold War between them.", "questions": [ { "id": "stages-and-transitions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the lifecycle of a Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War, how often and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-record", "name": "Observation record", "description": "How an observation of a Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War and what marks it done.", "questions": [ { "id": "steps-and-preconditions-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a step of a Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War consumes and what it produces.", "findings": [ { "id": "inputs-and-outputs", "name": "Inputs, outputs and side effects", "description": "The resources a Cold War 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War is known, and what must it refuse?", "kind": "action", "answer_data": [ "permitted actions", "preconditions", "refusals", "escalation" ] } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "extent-and-dating", "name": "Temporal extent and dating", "description": "When Cold War began and ended, and who says so.", "rationale": "Dates for events are conventions held by historiographies that disagree, and a single confident date hides the disagreement.", "layers": [ { "id": "dating", "name": "Dating and calendar", "description": "Start, end, granularity and the calendar used.", "findings": [ { "id": "date-record", "name": "Dates, granularity and authority", "description": "What is dated, how precisely, and on whose account.", "questions": [ { "id": "date-record-q01", "text": "What start and end are conventionally given for Cold War, at what granularity, in which calendar?", "kind": "definition" }, { "id": "date-record-q02", "text": "Which accounts date it differently, and on what grounds?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] }, { "id": "membership-of-the-event", "name": "What counts as part of it", "description": "Sub-events included or excluded, and by whom.", "findings": [ { "id": "inclusion", "name": "Inclusion and exclusion", "description": "The episodes treated as inside the event and those left out.", "questions": [ { "id": "inclusion-q01", "text": "Which episodes are counted as part of Cold War, and which are treated as separate?", "kind": "boundary" }, { "id": "inclusion-q02", "text": "Whose framing is being followed in that inclusion, and who frames it otherwise?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "participants-and-consequence", "name": "Participants, causes and consequences", "description": "Who took part in Cold War and what is claimed to follow from it.", "rationale": "Causation around events is asserted rather than observed, so each claim needs the party asserting it.", "layers": [ { "id": "participants", "name": "Participants and roles", "description": "Parties involved and what each did.", "findings": [ { "id": "participant-record", "name": "Parties and their roles", "description": "Who is recorded as involved and in what capacity.", "questions": [ { "id": "participant-record-q01", "text": "Which parties took part in Cold War, in what roles, and on whose account?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "participant-record-q02", "text": "Where do accounts disagree about who was involved?", "kind": "boundary" } ] } ] }, { "id": "consequences", "name": "Causes and consequences", "description": "What is claimed to have caused it and followed from it.", "findings": [ { "id": "causal-claims", "name": "Causal claims and who makes them", "description": "Antecedents and outcomes as attributed claims.", "questions": [ { "id": "causal-claims-q01", "text": "What causes and consequences are attributed to Cold War, and by whom?", "kind": "provenance" }, { "id": "causal-claims-q02", "text": "What would an agent need before treating such a claim as settled rather than contested?", "kind": "action" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "provenance-and-evidence", "name": "Provenance, evidence and time", "description": "Where every claim about a Cold War 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 Cold War and how confident it is.", "questions": [ { "id": "claim-provenance-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes a claim about a Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 Cold War is retired without being erased.", "questions": [ { "id": "validity-and-supersession-q01", "text": "What identifies and describes the validity of a claim about a Cold War, 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 Cold War, 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 Cold War 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 } } } }