{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T10:31:27Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 18.1, "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: 01a0952b-0f20-7f50-8347-6597f853734a\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: International regime\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.MED\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043:", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 65.6, "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: 01a0952b-0f15-7131-add9-75a58bc93052\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: International regime\nRegistry id: vr.tr.international-regime\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.MED\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into thi" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:45:55+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "visual_identification" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:25+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q1184919", "registryId": "vr.tr.international-regime", "name": "International regime", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.MED" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q1184919/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.international-regime", "name": "International regime", "purpose": "Enable an AI agent to identify an international regime, assess how its shared expectations and arrangements operate, and determine which actions participants can take under them.", "definition": "An international regime is a set of explicit or implicit principles, norms, rules and decision-making procedures around which actors' expectations converge in a particular area of international relations.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the issue-specific configuration of principles, norms, rules and decision procedures through which international actors coordinate expectations and conduct, including informal arrangements and implementation relationships.", "in_scope": [ "The issue area, participating actors and activities governed by the regime", "Constitutive principles, expected conduct, operational rules and their relationships", "Participation, decision procedures and allocation of authority", "Implementation, monitoring, dispute handling and responses to non-compliance", "Regime evolution, contested interpretations and overlap with other regimes" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The internal administration of an international organisation supporting the regime", "The complete legal analysis and textual history of an individual treaty", "Domestic political regimes and national constitutional arrangements", "The international system as a whole or general patterns of geopolitical influence", "Individual diplomatic negotiations, disputes or enforcement operations except as evidence of regime operation" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Identify an issue-specific configuration of shared expectations and recurring coordination; a single diplomatic interaction is insufficient on its own.", "Distinguish the regime from a treaty: determine which expectations and practices extend beyond a particular legal instrument or operate without one.", "Distinguish the regime from an organisation: identify its governing arrangements independently of the body that administers some of them.", "Distinguish international coordination from a domestic political regime by identifying the actors and cross-border conduct to which expectations apply.", "Test whether apparently separate instruments form one regime through shared principles and procedures, or belong to overlapping regimes with distinct governing arrangements." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Governed issue area", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named issue area with explicit activity, territorial and actor boundaries", "why_it_matters": "Prevents the model from treating all cooperation among the same actors as one regime." }, { "name": "Participant position", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Actor linked to a dated role such as party, member, observer, implementing body or affected non-participant", "why_it_matters": "Separates participation rights from exposure to regime effects." }, { "name": "Basis of expected conduct", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Legally binding instrument, political commitment, informal norm, established practice or contested basis; assessed per expectation", "why_it_matters": "An agent must not treat every expectation as an enforceable legal obligation." }, { "name": "Decision authority", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Actor or body linked to a decision type, procedure, mandate and review route", "why_it_matters": "Determines who can adopt rules, interpret them or authorise collective action." }, { "name": "Implementation condition", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Implemented, partially implemented, unimplemented, disputed or unknown; qualified by rule, actor and date", "why_it_matters": "Avoids collapsing uneven implementation into a single regime-wide status." }, { "name": "Observed compliance", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Compliant assessed cases divided by all assessed cases, with rule, population, period and assessment method stated", "why_it_matters": "Makes compliance comparisons interpretable and exposes missing observations." }, { "name": "Institutional condition", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Operating, adapting, dormant, fragmenting, terminated or uncertain, supported by dated evidence", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes continuing formal existence from active coordination." }, { "name": "Relationship to neighbouring regimes", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Complementary, overlapping, nested, competing or conflicting, with the affected issue and rule identified", "why_it_matters": "Reveals when an action requires considering more than one governing arrangement." } ], "affordances": [ "Determine whether a proposed activity and actor fall within the regime's scope.", "Identify applicable expectations and distinguish legal duties from political or informal commitments.", "Locate authorised routes for participation, proposals, interpretation requests and disputes.", "Compare reported implementation with independently observed conduct and record disagreements.", "Trace amendments, withdrawals and practice changes to their effects on particular participants.", "Flag overlapping or conflicting regime requirements before proposing an action." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain international regime theory and its main examples from scholarly sources.", "Identify the principles, norms and rules of a named regime." ], "must_not": [ "Present a theoretical interpretation as fact.", "Misattribute positions to states or scholars.", "Present a regime as binding law where it is not." ], "requires_human": [ "Publishing policy analysis used in negotiations." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Regimes shape global cooperation on matters such as trade and the environment.", "Powerful states can shape regimes to their advantage." ], "affected_parties": [ "States and their populations", "International organizations", "Researchers" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the concept; each regime is held by the states that take part.", "master_systems": [] }, "visual_identification": [ "Not visible; it appears in treaties, institutions and the practices of states." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Overstating regime effectiveness can mislead policy.", "Misapplying the concept confuses analysis." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "International regimes are encountered in cooperation over issues such as trade, climate, security and shared resources.", "They help participants coordinate expectations, interpret commitments and organize collective decisions through formal agreements or informal arrangements.", "An international regime can span several organizations and agreements without having a single governing institution." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, adopted by the United Nations Conference on the Law of Treaties in 1969, governs relevant treaty relationships within treaty-based regimes where applicable." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q1184919: International regime", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1184919", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: International regime", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_regime", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "regime-identity-and-boundaries", "name": "Regime identity and boundaries", "description": "Establish what makes the arrangements one international regime and where that regime ends.", "rationale": "Regimes may span several instruments and institutions, making their identity an analytical question rather than a title lookup.", "layers": [ { "id": "issue-and-activity-boundaries", "name": "Issue and activity boundaries", "description": "Specify the international problem and conduct around which expectations converge.", "findings": [ { "id": "governed-problem-and-conduct", "name": "Governed problem and conduct", "description": "Record the proposed issue boundary and evidence that participants organise recurring coordination around it.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which international problem, activities and actor relationships define this regime's issue area?", "kind": "definition", "id": "governed-problem-and-conduct-q01" }, { "text": "Which adjacent activities remain outside that boundary even when the same actors or institutions are involved?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "governed-problem-and-conduct-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "constitutive-configuration", "name": "Constitutive configuration", "description": "Identify the instruments and practices that collectively constitute the regime.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-of-a-shared-regime", "name": "Evidence of a shared regime", "description": "Treat the grouping of treaties, practices and bodies as a proposition requiring evidence.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which instruments, statements and recurring practices support treating these arrangements as one regime?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "evidence-of-a-shared-regime-q01" }, { "text": "What connects them beyond shared membership, and what would justify modelling them as separate regimes?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "evidence-of-a-shared-regime-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "principles-norms-and-rules", "name": "Principles, norms and rules", "description": "Describe the content and basis of the expectations governing participant conduct.", "rationale": "Recognising a regime requires separating its underlying commitments from specific prescriptions and determining their force.", "layers": [ { "id": "foundational-expectations", "name": "Foundational expectations", "description": "Capture the purposes, assumptions and standards participants invoke to justify cooperation.", "findings": [ { "id": "principles-and-accepted-conduct", "name": "Principles and accepted conduct", "description": "Record foundational commitments together with the extent to which their meaning and acceptance are disputed.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which principles and standards of appropriate conduct do participants invoke as foundational?", "kind": "definition", "id": "principles-and-accepted-conduct-q01" }, { "text": "Whose statements and conduct support their acceptance, and which participants contest them?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "principles-and-accepted-conduct-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operational-prescriptions", "name": "Operational prescriptions", "description": "Translate governing expectations into actor-specific requirements, permissions and exceptions.", "findings": [ { "id": "rule-applicability-and-force", "name": "Rule applicability and force", "description": "Identify what each prescription requires, its authority and the circumstances limiting its application.", "questions": [ { "text": "For a specified actor and activity, what is required, permitted or prohibited, and on what legal or political basis?", "kind": "action", "id": "rule-applicability-and-force-q01" }, { "text": "Which reservations, exceptions, differentiated commitments or disputed interpretations change its application?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "rule-applicability-and-force-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "participation-and-collective-authority", "name": "Participation and collective authority", "description": "Map participant positions and the procedures through which the regime makes consequential decisions.", "rationale": "Being affected by a regime does not necessarily confer membership, decision rights or authority to act on its behalf.", "layers": [ { "id": "participant-positions", "name": "Participant positions", "description": "Differentiate formal participation, practical involvement and exposure to regime decisions.", "findings": [ { "id": "access-rights-and-exit", "name": "Access, rights and exit", "description": "Record how actors obtain or lose standing and what each position permits.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which states, international bodies and non-state actors participate, and what standing does each have?", "kind": "definition", "id": "access-rights-and-exit-q01" }, { "text": "What procedures govern accession, observer access, suspension or withdrawal, including any continuing commitments?", "kind": "action", "id": "access-rights-and-exit-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "decision-and-interpretation-procedures", "name": "Decision and interpretation procedures", "description": "Identify how proposals become decisions and how contested meanings are addressed.", "findings": [ { "id": "mandates-and-decision-effects", "name": "Mandates and decision effects", "description": "Connect each decision route to its authorised participants, adoption conditions and consequences.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who may propose, adopt, block or review a decision, and under which consensus, voting or informal procedure?", "kind": "action", "id": "mandates-and-decision-effects-q01" }, { "text": "What establishes a body's authority to interpret rules, and for whom does its interpretation have effect?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "mandates-and-decision-effects-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "implementation-and-accountability", "name": "Implementation and accountability", "description": "Assess how expectations become conduct and how departures are detected and addressed.", "rationale": "Formal commitments alone do not establish implementation, compliance or successful coordination.", "layers": [ { "id": "implementation-and-observation", "name": "Implementation and observation", "description": "Trace implementation responsibilities and evaluate the evidence available about participant behaviour.", "findings": [ { "id": "implementation-evidence-and-gaps", "name": "Implementation evidence and gaps", "description": "Separate reported measures, observed conduct and missing information for particular commitments.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which domestic or international actors must implement each commitment, and what measures demonstrate implementation?", "kind": "action", "id": "implementation-evidence-and-gaps-q01" }, { "text": "How is compliance assessed, over which cases and period, and how are self-reporting, independent verification and missing data distinguished?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "implementation-evidence-and-gaps-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "disputes-and-responses", "name": "Disputes and responses", "description": "Record available responses to disagreements, incapacity and alleged breaches.", "findings": [ { "id": "authorised-response-pathways", "name": "Authorised response pathways", "description": "Identify applicable routes for clarification, assistance, adjudication or other responses without assuming enforcement machinery exists.", "questions": [ { "text": "What avenues exist to raise a concern, obtain assistance, contest a finding or resolve a dispute, and who has access?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-response-pathways-q01" }, { "text": "Which responses to non-compliance are authorised or established in practice, and what evidence supports their use?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "authorised-response-pathways-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "change-overlap-and-outcomes", "name": "Change, overlap and outcomes", "description": "Track regime evolution, relationships with other arrangements and evidence of effects.", "rationale": "A regime can persist formally while its practices, authority or contribution to the governed problem change.", "layers": [ { "id": "continuity-and-regime-interaction", "name": "Continuity and regime interaction", "description": "Assess changes within the regime and its connections to neighbouring governance arrangements.", "findings": [ { "id": "revision-continuity-and-overlap", "name": "Revision, continuity and overlap", "description": "Record when changes alter existing arrangements and when they may indicate replacement, fragmentation or competing governance.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which amendments, participant changes or shifts in practice alter the regime, and what establishes their effective dates?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "revision-continuity-and-overlap-q01" }, { "text": "Where do other regimes govern the same conduct, and what evidence establishes coordination, precedence or unresolved conflict?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "revision-continuity-and-overlap-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "performance-and-distribution", "name": "Performance and distribution", "description": "Distinguish institutional activity, behavioural effects and changes in the underlying problem.", "findings": [ { "id": "effects-and-attribution", "name": "Effects and attribution", "description": "Assess claimed outcomes and their distribution while preserving uncertainty about causation.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which indicators distinguish meetings and adopted measures from behavioural change and improvement in the governed problem?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "effects-and-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence attributes observed changes to the regime, and how do benefits, burdens and excluded interests vary across actors?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "effects-and-attribution-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 definition follows the established Krasner formulation from international relations scholarship; this response is based on recall rather than source consultation.", "The listed kinds are issue-area classifications, not an exhaustive or universally standardised taxonomy.", "No sense is recorded; verify that the registry intends the international relations concept, especially because the supplied batch framing emphasises works and media." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of International regime 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": [ "Trade regimes", "Monetary regimes", "Environmental regimes", "Human rights regimes", "Arms control and non-proliferation regimes" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of International regime 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": [ "Coordinating state behaviour around shared problems.", "Establishing expectations about acceptable conduct.", "Organising information exchange, reporting and monitoring.", "Providing procedures for negotiation and dispute settlement.", "Supporting cooperation despite the absence of a central international government." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of International regime 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": [ "Non-compliance and weak enforcement undermine shared expectations.", "Free riding reduces incentives to provide collective benefits.", "Unequal bargaining power produces rules or benefits favouring dominant participants.", "Overlapping regimes create conflicting obligations or opportunities for forum shopping.", "Changing interests or power distributions cause deadlock, withdrawal or institutional erosion." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of International regime 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": [ "Regimes may operate globally or among participants within a particular region.", "Participation, implementation capacity and influence over rule-making can differ substantially across regions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of International regime 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": "International organisation", "difference": "An organisation has an organisational identity and organs; a regime is a system of governing expectations and practices that may involve several organisations or no dedicated organisation." }, { "name": "International treaty", "difference": "A treaty is a legally binding international agreement; a regime may encompass multiple treaties alongside informal norms and procedures." }, { "name": "International law", "difference": "International law concerns legally recognised rules and obligations; regimes can include non-binding expectations and are typically organised around particular issue areas." }, { "name": "Regime complex", "difference": "A regime complex comprises overlapping, partly autonomous regimes or institutions rather than one regime." }, { "name": "Political regime", "difference": "A political regime concerns how political authority is organised and exercised within a polity; an international regime governs interactions in an international issue area." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of International regime this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend the international-relations concept of an issue-specific regime, a narrower legal meaning, or another usage?", "What minimum evidence of shared expectations distinguishes an informal international regime from recurring cooperation or a proposed arrangement?", "How should contested regime boundaries be represented when participants and researchers group the same instruments differently?", "When do changes in principles, membership or practices warrant recognising a successor regime rather than a new state of the existing regime?", "Which outcome measures and attribution methods are appropriate across different issue areas without implying that compliance alone establishes effectiveness?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 16, "questions": 26 } }