{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T09:47:46Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 21.0, "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: 01a09502-c1c2-7142-8732-101f5189a044\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: focalization\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: ACT.ACT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043: 1001 re", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 86.3, "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: 01a09502-c1be-7551-9395-d48fd1a75d4f\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: focalization\nRegistry id: vr.tr.focalization\nPlane / domain: ACT / ACT.ACT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:48:24+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "owners" ] }, "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-Q1307662", "registryId": "vr.tr.focalization", "name": "focalization", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "ACT.ACT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q1307662/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.focalization", "name": "focalization", "purpose": "Enable an agent to identify, compare and revise how a narrative regulates access to knowledge and experience while preserving competing interpretations of focalization.", "definition": "In narratology, focalization is the selection or restriction of narrative information relative to the knowledge, perception, or experience of narrators and characters, distinguished analytically from who speaks.", "scope_statement": "This draft interprets vr.tr.focalization as the narratological concept; it owns evidence-based accounts of informational restriction and experiential orientation within identified narrative segments, with explicit theoretical commitments.", "in_scope": [ "Competing definitions and their consequences for classifying a narrative passage", "Relations between presented information, character knowledge and represented experience", "Attribution of perceptual, cognitive and evaluative orientation", "Segment boundaries, changes of focalization and apparent exceptions", "Evidence supporting annotation and constraints on narrative revision" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Narrator identity, narrative voice and grammatical person except as linked evidence", "Plot structure and chronology except where they affect access to information", "Character psychology beyond what supports a focalization judgment", "Optical focusing, linguistic focus and general attentional processes", "Camera placement and editing considered independently of narrative information", "Reader empathy and suspense as outcomes requiring separate evidence" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Identify whose knowledge or experience constrains a passage independently of who speaks; first-person grammar alone does not establish its focalization.", "Distinguish a character being described from a character whose experience organizes the description.", "Require evidence of narrative access or orientation before treating a glance, close-up or perception verb as focalization.", "Test restricted access separately from truthfulness: a passage can limit information without making its narrator unreliable.", "Attach every classification to a named framework and bounded passage rather than assuming one label covers an entire work." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Interpretive framework", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named theorist, work and definition; explicitly declared local operationalization", "why_it_matters": "The same label can encode different distinctions across theories." }, { "name": "Analyzed extent", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Work and version linked to passage offsets, scene identifiers or timecodes", "why_it_matters": "Makes the classification inspectable and limits its reach." }, { "name": "Framework-specific classification", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Genette: zero, internal or external; alternative framework: its own vocabulary; mixed or undetermined when justified", "why_it_matters": "Supports comparison without silently equating incompatible taxonomies." }, { "name": "Orientation anchor", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Character, narrator, hypothetical position, multiple anchors or unassigned; include relevant story time", "why_it_matters": "Allows attribution without requiring every theory to posit a focalizing agent." }, { "name": "Information access", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Proposition linked to presentation point, relevant knower and evidence of availability or exclusion", "why_it_matters": "Makes claims about informational limits testable." }, { "name": "Experiential cues", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Perceptual, cognitive, emotional, evaluative or spatial-deictic; each with evidence", "why_it_matters": "Separates different grounds for attributing subjective orientation." }, { "name": "Interpretation status", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposed, supported, disputed, underdetermined or superseded", "why_it_matters": "Prevents uncertain readings from becoming settled properties of the narrative." }, { "name": "Annotated transition count", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Number of supported transitions within a specified extent and segmentation protocol", "why_it_matters": "Permits comparison only when the counting rules and analyzed extent are shared." } ], "affordances": [ "Annotate a passage with framework-specific classifications and supporting evidence", "Compare alternative readings without collapsing their theoretical differences", "Trace information disclosure against a character's knowledge at a specified moment", "Locate possible shifts or exceptions for human review", "Rewrite a passage under a declared access constraint and inspect newly introduced disclosures", "Compare an adaptation with its source through matched narrative events and information access" ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain focalization and its types with examples from literature.", "Analyse focalization in texts the user provides." ], "must_not": [ "Present one theorist's model as the only accepted account.", "Reproduce long copyrighted passages as examples.", "Confuse focalization with the identity of the narrator." ], "requires_human": [ "Grading students' work on narrative analysis." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Fair representation of scholarly debate helps students think for themselves.", "Authors deserve their work to be quoted only within fair limits." ], "affected_parties": [ "Students", "Authors", "Literary scholars" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the concept; narratologists maintain its definition.", "master_systems": [] }, "what_it_is_for": [ "Focalization is used in literary criticism, film analysis and narrative design to describe whose knowledge or experience limits the information presented.", "Writers and editors examine focalization when managing suspense, revealing character experience or checking consistency in narrative perspective." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Confusing the focalizing perspective with the narrator can produce misleading interpretations of a narrative.", "Treating a character's restricted perceptions as established facts can reproduce that character's prejudices in analysis.", "Unintended changes in focalization can disclose information prematurely or undermine narrative coherence." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "interfaces": "No formal standard, law or official classification specifically governs focalization as a narrative concept.", "recognition": "Focalization is an interpretive relationship within a narrative and has no directly perceptible physical appearance." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q1307662: focalization", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1307662", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Focalisation", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focalisation", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "definitions-and-classification", "name": "Definitions and classification", "description": "Record what focalization means in the analysis before assigning a type.", "rationale": "An agent needs to know which disagreement it is evaluating rather than treating terminology as universal.", "layers": [ { "id": "theoretical-commitments", "name": "Theoretical commitments", "description": "Separate informational and perspectival accounts.", "findings": [ { "id": "definition-with-attribution", "name": "Definition with attribution", "description": "Genette emphasizes information restriction; Bal recasts focalization through subject-object relations. Record the adopted definition and attribution. These positions are surveyed in [Niederhoff, Focalization](https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/18/revisions/211/view.html).", "questions": [ { "text": "Which theorist, publication and passage supply the operative definition?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "definition-with-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "Does this analysis test information restriction, represented experience or an explicitly defined combination?", "kind": "definition", "id": "definition-with-attribution-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "classification-rules", "name": "Classification rules", "description": "Make each type assignment reproducible within its framework.", "findings": [ { "id": "type-and-counterexample", "name": "Type and counterexample", "description": "Under Genette's typology, zero, internal and external distinguish informational access; Bal's external category is not equivalent to Genette's. Preserve separate vocabularies. See [Niederhoff, Focalization](https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/18/revisions/211/view.html).", "questions": [ { "text": "What passage-level observation qualifies this instance for the proposed type?", "kind": "definition", "id": "type-and-counterexample-q01" }, { "text": "What counterexample would require changing or withholding that classification?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "type-and-counterexample-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "knowledge-and-experience", "name": "Knowledge and experience", "description": "Represent the evidence connecting narrative disclosures to situated knowledge and experience.", "rationale": "Focalization judgments need more precise support than identifying the protagonist or counting references to a character.", "layers": [ { "id": "disclosure-and-access", "name": "Disclosure and access", "description": "Track what becomes available, to whom and when.", "findings": [ { "id": "proposition-access-trace", "name": "Proposition access trace", "description": "For the proposed operationalization, connect each decisive disclosure to its narrative location and evidence about the relevant character's access.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which disclosed facts could the proposed anchor perceive, remember, infer or learn at this moment?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "proposition-access-trace-q01" }, { "text": "Which facts exceed that access, and does the passage establish another route by which they became available?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "proposition-access-trace-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "experiential-attribution", "name": "Experiential attribution", "description": "Test whose experience shapes presentation without assuming that knowledge alignment settles the issue.", "findings": [ { "id": "orientation-evidence", "name": "Orientation evidence", "description": "Klauk and Köppe treat the relation between informational restriction and subjective perspective as an unresolved definitional problem. Record evidence for each separately. See [Puzzles and Problems for the Theory of Focalization](https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/24.html).", "questions": [ { "text": "Which sensory details, evaluations or deictic expressions support attribution to a particular experience?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "orientation-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Could the same wording belong to narrator commentary or neutral exposition, and what discriminates those readings?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "orientation-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "extent-shifts-and-exceptions", "name": "Extent, shifts and exceptions", "description": "Track where a focalization claim applies and how it changes across the narrative.", "rationale": "A local disclosure should neither determine the whole work's classification nor disappear beneath a global label.", "layers": [ { "id": "segment-and-anchor-transitions", "name": "Segment and anchor transitions", "description": "Locate changes in access or experiential orientation.", "findings": [ { "id": "bounded-transition-map", "name": "Bounded transition map", "description": "Record passage boundaries and candidate transitions, distinguishing a change of anchor from a change of scene or speaker.", "questions": [ { "text": "At which exact words, frames or sounds does the evidence support a change in access or orientation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "bounded-transition-map-q01" }, { "text": "Does the transition change the anchor, revisit an event through another anchor or merely change location?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "bounded-transition-map-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "norms-and-departures", "name": "Norms and departures", "description": "Evaluate apparent exceptions against an evidenced local pattern.", "findings": [ { "id": "departure-from-access-pattern", "name": "Departure from access pattern", "description": "Genette calls transgressive additions paralepsis and transgressive omissions paralipsis; the relevant informational norm must be established rather than assumed. See [Niederhoff, Focalization](https://www-archiv.fdm.uni-hamburg.de/lhn/node/18/revisions/211/view.html).", "questions": [ { "text": "Which surrounding passages establish the access pattern allegedly violated here?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "departure-from-access-pattern-q01" }, { "text": "Is the apparent departure better explained by a shift, retrospective knowledge, ordinary omission or an unresolved reading?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "departure-from-access-pattern-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "interpretation-and-revision", "name": "Interpretation and revision", "description": "Turn focalization analysis into reviewable annotation and constrained narrative changes.", "rationale": "An agent must preserve uncertainty while using the analysis to make concrete decisions about a passage.", "layers": [ { "id": "annotation-adjudication", "name": "Annotation adjudication", "description": "Make interpretive disagreement actionable.", "findings": [ { "id": "rival-readings-record", "name": "Rival readings record", "description": "Retain alternative labels with their passage evidence, framework and decisive unresolved issue; do not treat agreement as a substitute for justification.", "questions": [ { "text": "Do the rival readings disagree about the evidence, the passage boundary or the definition of focalization?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "rival-readings-record-q01" }, { "text": "What additional context or expert judgment could resolve the difference, and when should the annotation remain undetermined?", "kind": "action", "id": "rival-readings-record-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "constrained-transformation", "name": "Constrained transformation", "description": "Specify and review a requested change in narrative access.", "findings": [ { "id": "revision-access-contract", "name": "Revision access contract", "description": "Before rewriting or adapting, declare the intended anchor, permitted disclosures and protected ambiguities; compare the result against that contract.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which facts and experiences may the revised passage disclose, and which must remain inaccessible at this point?", "kind": "action", "id": "revision-access-contract-q01" }, { "text": "Which wording, images or sounds in the revision introduce access inconsistent with the declared constraint?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "revision-access-contract-q02" }, { "text": "Does the proposed change require approval because it resolves an ambiguity the original passage left open?", "kind": "action", "id": "revision-access-contract-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "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 narratological sense is assumed because no sense was recorded; the domain code alone does not establish it.", "The classification follows Gérard Genette; fixed, variable, and multiple are subdivisions of internal focalization, not categories at the same level as zero, internal, and external.", "Definitions are contested: Genette emphasizes information restriction, while Mieke Bal develops focalization around the relation between a perceiving subject and a perceived object; these approaches should not be treated as interchangeable." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of focalization 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": [ "Zero focalization: narrative information is not restricted to what any one character knows.", "Internal focalization: information is restricted to a character's knowledge or experience.", "External focalization: narration presents outwardly observable actions and appearances without access to characters' thoughts.", "Fixed internal focalization: one character supplies the focal restriction.", "Variable internal focalization: the focal restriction shifts between characters.", "Multiple internal focalization: the same event is presented through several characters." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of focalization 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": [ "Literary analysis of how narratives distribute knowledge and represent experience.", "Analysis of suspense, surprise, and dramatic irony through differences in audience and character knowledge.", "Creative writing and editing to manage access to characters' perceptions and thoughts.", "Film and other media analysis, with adaptations for visual and auditory presentation.", "Comparison of perspective and information access across adaptations." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of focalization 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": [ "Conflating the narrator who speaks with the perspective or informational restriction governing the narration.", "Inferring focalization directly from first-person or third-person grammar.", "Assigning one category to an entire work despite local shifts and exceptions.", "Treating external focalization as necessarily objective or ideologically neutral.", "Applying literary categories to film or games without accounting for medium-specific information channels." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of focalization 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": "Narrative voice", "difference": "Voice concerns who narrates; focalization concerns the knowledge or experience relative to which information is selected." }, { "name": "Point of view", "difference": "Point of view is a broader, variably defined term that may combine narrator position, perception, and evaluation; focalization separates out particular aspects of perspective and information access." }, { "name": "Unreliable narration", "difference": "Unreliability concerns the credibility or adequacy of a narrator's account; focalization concerns its informational restriction, which need not make it unreliable." }, { "name": "Free indirect discourse", "difference": "Free indirect discourse is a mode of representing speech or thought; internal focalization can occur with or without that mode." }, { "name": "Ocularization", "difference": "In film analysis, ocularization concerns the relation between the image and a character's seeing, whereas focalization concerns access to narrative knowledge." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of focalization this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend narratological focalization, and what registry provenance can confirm that interpretation given the missing definition?", "Which operationalization best separates informational restriction from experiential orientation without erasing their overlap?", "When should retrospective narration receive multiple temporal anchors rather than one focalization label?", "What segmentation and adjudication protocol yields defensible annotations for ambiguous or rapidly shifting passages?", "Which medium-specific criteria are needed for film, audio and interactive narratives where visual, auditory and playable access diverge?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 9, "findings": 13, "questions": 22 } }