{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T08:51:25Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 26.5, "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: 01a094cf-4d27-7552-974b-c07131907f92\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: cooperation\nSense to describe: joint operation or action\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 77.0, "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: 01a094cf-4d18-7393-bcc9-02aef672783d\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: cooperation\nRegistry id: vr.tr.cooperation\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: joint operation or action\nNames folded into this entry:" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:56:27+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "standards_and_regulation" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T12:16:27+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: WordNet gloss", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-COOPERATION", "registryId": "vr.tr.cooperation", "name": "cooperation", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/cooperation/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.cooperation", "name": "cooperation", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to recognise joint operation or action, assess how participants cooperate, and identify authorised ways to support, revise, or end that cooperation.", "definition": "Cooperation is joint or mutually supporting action by two or more participants whose contributions further a shared objective or compatible objectives, without requiring equal contributions, equal benefits, or agreement on every interest.", "scope_statement": "This model owns cooperation as an episode or continuing arrangement of joint operation or action, including its interpretive basis, participants, connected contributions, coordination, and conditions for continuation; it records disputed criteria without treating one definition as universally settled.", "in_scope": [ "Criteria and evidence for identifying cooperation under a stated interpretation", "Participants, their contributions, and the relationship between their purposes", "Dependencies, communication, and adjustment between contributions", "Terms of participation, distribution of burdens and benefits, and handling of non-performance", "The condition, results, revision, and termination of cooperative action" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Complete organisational structures and institutional governance", "General theories of altruism, trust, reciprocity, or collective action", "Standalone contracts and their legal enforceability", "Independent activities connected only by an observer's classification", "Competition, conflict, or negotiation beyond their interface with the cooperative action" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Identify how at least two participants' contributions connect in a joint operation; simultaneous activity or similar behaviour alone does not establish cooperation.", "Record whether participants orient their conduct to the joint operation or to one another; where awareness or intention is not required, identify the interpretation that permits that classification.", "Distinguish an enabling arrangement such as a schedule from participants actually contributing to the operation it coordinates.", "Separate cooperation from altruistic motivation: investigate connected action even when participants seek different benefits or receive unequal returns.", "Distinguish evidence of cooperation from evidence of success, consent, or legitimacy; none should be inferred solely from the others." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Interpretation of cooperation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Explicit criterion set, attributed to a source or participant; unresolved where interpretations conflict", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether shared intention, mutual adjustment, benefit, or another condition is required to recognise an instance." }, { "name": "Participation status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Per participant: proposed, accepted, contributing, paused, withdrawn, excluded, disputed, or unknown", "why_it_matters": "Separates prospective commitments from actual participation and identifies changes affecting joint action." }, { "name": "Relationship between purposes", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Participant purposes linked to joint operation: shared, compatible, partly conflicting, disputed, or unknown", "why_it_matters": "Makes visible how participants can act together without agreeing on every objective." }, { "name": "Contribution dependency", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Directed links between participant contributions, with prerequisite, timing, substitution, and acceptance conditions", "why_it_matters": "Shows where another participant's action enables, constrains, or completes a contribution." }, { "name": "Participation terms", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Per participant: voluntary, conditional, directed, compelled, disputed, or unknown, with supporting evidence", "why_it_matters": "Prevents joint performance from being treated as sufficient evidence of consent." }, { "name": "Coordination mode", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Direct mutual adjustment, delegated coordination, shared protocol, environmental cues, mixed, or undetermined", "why_it_matters": "Identifies how participants connect their actions and where coordination can fail." }, { "name": "Contribution fulfilment", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Accepted contributions divided by contributions due within a stated interval, with numerator, denominator, and acceptance rule", "why_it_matters": "Supports assessment of delivery while preserving the distinction between fulfilment, effort, and cooperative intent." }, { "name": "Distribution of burdens and benefits", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Participant-linked expected and realised costs, risks, benefits, and allocation rules, using locally appropriate units", "why_it_matters": "Reveals asymmetries that may affect willingness or ability to continue." }, { "name": "Condition of joint action", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed, active, impaired, suspended, completed, dissolved, disputed, or unknown", "why_it_matters": "Guides whether an agent should support execution, seek repair, verify completion, or handle exit." } ], "affordances": [ "Assess whether observed conduct qualifies as cooperation under explicit criteria and record competing classifications.", "Map participants, contributions, dependencies, and differences between participant purposes.", "Identify missing contributions, coordination failures, and disputed expectations for participant review.", "Propose changes to contribution terms, information sharing, or burden allocation within recorded authority.", "Track joint progress separately from participant benefits, consent, and legitimacy.", "Support authorised repair, suspension, completion, or withdrawal while accounting for dependent participants." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Coordinate its own work with other agents and people toward a shared goal they have agreed.", "Describe cooperation and its study in game theory and social science, with sources." ], "must_not": [ "Join a coordination that fixes prices, rigs bids or shuts others out of a market.", "Claim a shared effort as its own work, or hide who contributed.", "Coordinate with other agents to bypass a limit a person or operator has set.", "Present participation as voluntary when a party had no real choice." ], "requires_human": [ "Entering a cooperation agreement on a person's or organization's behalf." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Cooperation can be used to collude against outsiders as easily as to help them.", "Unequal partners can be pressed into contributing more than they gain." ], "affected_parties": [ "Partners in the effort", "Outsiders affected by it", "Weaker participants" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the concept; each cooperating party answers for its own part.", "master_systems": [] }, "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Free riding collapses cooperation that depends on shared effort.", "Coordinated action can turn into collusion against the public." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "National competition law, enforced by competition authorities, which limits coordination between competitors." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "Cooperation occurs in households, workplaces, communities and multi-agent systems when participants contribute toward shared or compatible objectives.", "It supports tasks that require coordinated effort, complementary capabilities or mutual assistance." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "recognition": "Cooperation is a relationship between participants' actions and objectives that cannot be established from visual appearance alone." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "oewn", "title": "Open English WordNet 2024, synset oewn-01205394-n", "url": "https://en-word.net/id/oewn-01205394-n", "what_it_supports": "sense and gloss of the concept", "url_status": "live", "checked_by": "http 200" }, { "id": "wiktionary-en", "title": "Wiktionary: cooperation", "url": "https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/cooperation", "what_it_supports": "word senses and usage", "url_status": "live", "checked_by": "http 200" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "recognising-cooperation", "name": "Recognising cooperation", "description": "Establishes why an episode counts as joint operation or action and which interpretation supports that judgement.", "rationale": "Cooperation can otherwise be inferred from co-presence, apparent harmony, or successful outcomes without evidence of connected action.", "layers": [ { "id": "definitional-commitments", "name": "Definitional commitments", "description": "Records the criteria used to recognise cooperation and disagreements over those criteria.", "findings": [ { "id": "qualification-criteria", "name": "Qualification criteria", "description": "A place to record the adopted definition, its attribution, and whether intention, awareness, benefit, or mutual adjustment is required.", "questions": [ { "text": "What must be present for joint operation or action to count as cooperation in this setting?", "kind": "definition", "id": "qualification-criteria-q01" }, { "text": "Which source or participant endorses these criteria, and whose competing interpretation would change the classification?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "qualification-criteria-q02" }, { "text": "Would compelled, unintentional, or unequally beneficial joint action qualify under the adopted criteria?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "qualification-criteria-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "instance-boundaries", "name": "Instance boundaries", "description": "Identifies the episode and evidence connecting participants' actions.", "findings": [ { "id": "joint-action-evidence", "name": "Joint action evidence", "description": "Records observable links between contributions and distinguishes the episode from coincidentally parallel activity.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence shows that participants' contributions connect in one operation rather than merely occur together?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "joint-action-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What marks the beginning, end, and boundary of this cooperation within a wider relationship?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "joint-action-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "participants-and-purposes", "name": "Participants and purposes", "description": "Connects participation, authority, and individual purposes to the joint operation.", "rationale": "An agent needs to distinguish contributors from beneficiaries and shared action from assumed agreement or consent.", "layers": [ { "id": "participation-and-authority", "name": "Participation and authority", "description": "Identifies who contributes and who can make commitments affecting those contributions.", "findings": [ { "id": "participant-standing", "name": "Participant standing", "description": "Records participants, representatives, participation terms, and limits on committing others.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who contributes to the joint operation, and who is only a beneficiary, observer, or affected party?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "participant-standing-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence establishes each participant's acceptance, direction, compulsion, or disputed involvement?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "participant-standing-q02" }, { "text": "Who may commit, revise, or withdraw each participant's contribution, and within what limits?", "kind": "action", "id": "participant-standing-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "purpose-alignment", "name": "Purpose alignment", "description": "Separates the joint operation from the purposes that bring each participant to it.", "findings": [ { "id": "shared-and-divergent-purposes", "name": "Shared and divergent purposes", "description": "Records agreements and differences over what participants are doing together and what each hopes to obtain.", "questions": [ { "text": "How does each participant describe the joint operation and their own reason for contributing?", "kind": "definition", "id": "shared-and-divergent-purposes-q01" }, { "text": "Which differences in purpose remain compatible with joint action, and which would prevent a required contribution?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "shared-and-divergent-purposes-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "contributions-and-coordination", "name": "Contributions and coordination", "description": "Describes how participants' actions combine and how they adjust when dependencies change.", "rationale": "The connection between contributions is central to cooperation and determines what practical assistance is useful.", "layers": [ { "id": "contribution-dependencies", "name": "Contribution dependencies", "description": "Maps what participants provide and how one contribution affects another.", "findings": [ { "id": "connected-contributions", "name": "Connected contributions", "description": "Records promised and observed contributions, their recipients, and their timing and acceptance conditions.", "questions": [ { "text": "What does each participant contribute, and which other contribution or joint result depends on it?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "connected-contributions-q01" }, { "text": "What timing, quality, or access conditions make each contribution usable by the others?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "connected-contributions-q02" }, { "text": "Which contributions can be substituted or reordered, and whose agreement is needed?", "kind": "action", "id": "connected-contributions-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "mutual-adjustment", "name": "Mutual adjustment", "description": "Records how participants signal progress, recognise changes, and coordinate responses.", "findings": [ { "id": "coordination-and-feedback", "name": "Coordination and feedback", "description": "Identifies communication, protocols, or cues that connect participant decisions during joint action.", "questions": [ { "text": "How do participants learn that a dependent contribution is ready, delayed, changed, or unusable?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "coordination-and-feedback-q01" }, { "text": "How are conflicting instructions or incompatible adjustments resolved, and who may decide?", "kind": "action", "id": "coordination-and-feedback-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "terms-and-continuation", "name": "Terms and continuation", "description": "Records the expectations, allocations, and responses that influence continued contribution.", "rationale": "Cooperative action can become unstable when burdens, benefits, or expectations diverge, even while contributions continue.", "layers": [ { "id": "burdens-benefits-and-expectations", "name": "Burdens, benefits, and expectations", "description": "Makes participant-specific terms and allocation disagreements visible.", "findings": [ { "id": "participation-exchange", "name": "Participation exchange", "description": "Records what participants expect to give, receive, and risk without assuming equal exchange or reciprocal motivation.", "questions": [ { "text": "What costs, risks, and benefits does each participant expect and actually experience?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "participation-exchange-q01" }, { "text": "Which allocation rules or reciprocal expectations have participants acknowledged, and which are merely inferred?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "participation-exchange-q02" }, { "text": "Which disputed terms require renegotiation for participants to remain willing and able to contribute?", "kind": "action", "id": "participation-exchange-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "non-performance-and-repair", "name": "Non-performance and repair", "description": "Distinguishes causes of missing contributions and records permissible responses.", "findings": [ { "id": "contribution-breakdown", "name": "Contribution breakdown", "description": "Records unmet expectations, competing explanations, and available routes to restore joint action.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence distinguishes inability, misunderstanding, dependency failure, and deliberate withholding in an unmet contribution?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "contribution-breakdown-q01" }, { "text": "What clarification, assistance, renegotiation, or escalation is authorised, and by whom?", "kind": "action", "id": "contribution-breakdown-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "assessment-and-transition", "name": "Assessment and transition", "description": "Assesses the condition and results of cooperation and manages changes or endings.", "rationale": "An agent must distinguish joint activity from its success and account for outstanding dependencies when participation changes.", "layers": [ { "id": "cooperative-performance", "name": "Cooperative performance", "description": "Separates evidence of connected contribution from joint results and participant outcomes.", "findings": [ { "id": "progress-and-outcomes", "name": "Progress and outcomes", "description": "Records contribution fulfilment, progress against agreed criteria, and differences in participant assessments.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which contributions were due and accepted during the assessment period, under whose acceptance criteria?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "progress-and-outcomes-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes successful joint results from continuing cooperation despite failure or delay?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "progress-and-outcomes-q02" }, { "text": "Where do participant assessments of progress or benefit disagree, and what evidence could resolve the disagreement?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "progress-and-outcomes-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "revision-and-exit", "name": "Revision and exit", "description": "Records conditions for changing, suspending, completing, or leaving joint action.", "findings": [ { "id": "cooperation-transition", "name": "Cooperation transition", "description": "Identifies transition triggers, decision authority, and consequences for contributions already underway.", "questions": [ { "text": "What conditions distinguish temporary interruption, participant withdrawal, completion, and dissolution of this cooperation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "cooperation-transition-q01" }, { "text": "Who may initiate each transition, and what notice, handover, or handling of outstanding contributions is required?", "kind": "action", "id": "cooperation-transition-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": [ "This describes cooperation as joint action; evolutionary biology also uses cooperation for behaviours defined through fitness effects without requiring conscious shared intentions.", "Shared intention, mutual benefit, and personal sacrifice receive different emphasis across philosophy, sociology, economics, and biology; no single operational definition covers all uses.", "The kinds overlap, and experimental measurements depend on how a study defines a cooperative choice; neither constitutes a universal classification or scale." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of cooperation 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": [ "Informal cooperation", "Formally organised cooperation", "Conditional cooperation", "Cooperation sustained by direct reciprocity", "Cooperation sustained by indirect reciprocity", "Interorganisational cooperation" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of cooperation this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "ISO 44001, issued by the International Organization for Standardization, specifies requirements for collaborative business relationship management systems; it addresses an organisational application rather than cooperation generally." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of cooperation 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": [ "Teams combine complementary contributions to complete shared tasks.", "Organisations share resources, information, or responsibilities through partnerships.", "Communities establish arrangements for managing shared resources.", "States coordinate action through treaties and international institutions.", "Researchers study cooperative behaviour using public-goods games, prisoner's-dilemma experiments, and observed collective activities." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of cooperation this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-measurements", "name": "Typical measurements", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "quantity": "Proportion of decisions classified as cooperative under a specified experimental rule", "typical_range": "0-1 by definition; observed values depend on the task and population", "unit": "proportion" }, { "quantity": "Contribution to a public good as a share of the participant's available endowment", "typical_range": "0-100 in experiments that restrict contributions to the available endowment", "unit": "percent" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of cooperation 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": [ "Free riding can undermine contributions when participants benefit without bearing corresponding costs.", "Mistrust and uncertainty about others' behaviour can prevent mutually beneficial action.", "Conflicting incentives, unclear responsibilities, or poor communication can disrupt joint work.", "Unequal bargaining power can produce cooperation that distributes costs and benefits unfairly.", "Cooperation among insiders can harm outsiders, as in collusion or exclusionary arrangements." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of cooperation 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": "coordination", "difference": "Coordination aligns actions or expectations; it can occur without participants contributing to a shared or mutually beneficial undertaking." }, { "name": "collaboration", "difference": "Collaboration often denotes more integrated joint work or shared production, but many fields use it interchangeably with cooperation." }, { "name": "collective action", "difference": "Collective action concerns action by multiple participants toward a collective outcome; cooperation describes how their contributions support that undertaking." }, { "name": "altruism", "difference": "Altruism concerns benefiting others, often at a cost to oneself; cooperation can benefit every participant and need not involve altruistic motivation." }, { "name": "competition", "difference": "Competition involves pursuit of outcomes that cannot all be obtained simultaneously; participants can nevertheless cooperate on some activities while competing on others." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of cooperation this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which reference works and research traditions should anchor the definition, and how do their requirements for shared intention, mutual adjustment, or benefit differ?", "Does this registry entry encompass biological and machine cooperation, and what recognition criteria remain usable when intentions cannot be reported?", "Under which interpretations does compelled or hierarchically directed joint action count as cooperation, and how should disputed classifications be represented?", "Which operational measures distinguish cooperation from coordination, collaboration, compliance, and coincidental alignment across relevant settings?", "Does an existing Vercy world model already own this concept, requiring a registry link rather than a separate publication?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 32 } }