{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T11:59:21Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 18.6, "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: 01a0957b-6cd2-7bd2-ac16-4687ee50b8ee\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: pentito\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: SOC.PER\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 044: 1001 registe", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 72.4, "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: 01a0957b-6cd1-7a00-9ef1-3d5001a74b7d\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: pentito\nRegistry id: vr.tr.pentito\nPlane / domain: SOC / SOC.PER\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\nContext " } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:42:30+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "owners" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:28+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q2032656", "registryId": "vr.tr.pentito", "name": "pentito", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "SOC.PER" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q2032656/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.pentito", "name": "pentito", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise a pentito as a criminal insider cooperating with justice, assess the documented state of that cooperation, and identify actions requiring evidential support or competent authority.", "definition": "A pentito is, in Italian public usage, a former participant in organised crime or terrorism who cooperates with judicial authorities by providing information or testimony about criminal activities and associates.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the pentito role associated with vr.tr.pentito: its attribution to a person, criminal-insider basis, cooperation with judicial authorities, and associated decisions and obligations, provisionally centred on Italian usage.", "in_scope": [ "Distinction between the colloquial label pentito and documented collaborator-of-justice status", "Criminal involvement and insider knowledge relevant to cooperation", "Cooperation episodes, disclosures and their evidential assessment", "Separate determinations concerning protection, benefits and obligations", "Changes in cooperation and the continuing accuracy of role attribution" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The person's complete biography and identity record", "The criminal organisation's full structure and activities", "Complete criminal proceedings, offences and sentencing models", "General witness, victim and whistleblower roles", "Religious penitence or psychological assessments of remorse", "Operational protection arrangements and protected locations" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "The role concerns a criminal insider's cooperation with justice; ordinary eyewitness assistance alone does not establish it.", "A pentito label must be distinguished from a testimone di giustizia classification; the legal distinction turns on involvement in the disclosed criminal events. See [Giustizia Amministrativa](https://www.giustizia-amministrativa.it/-/differenza-tra-collaboratore-di-giustizia-e-testimone-di-giustizia).", "A confession concerning only the speaker's conduct does not by itself establish the broader cooperation represented by this model.", "Public attribution, cooperation, formal protection and judicial benefits require separate evidence rather than inference from the word pentito.", "This is a context-dependent social and judicial role, not an occupation, qualification or verified state of moral repentance." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Role attribution basis", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "self-description | media attribution | authority description | documented legal status | disputed | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a colloquial label from becoming an unsupported legal classification." }, { "name": "Relevant criminal involvement", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Links to conduct or proceedings, with alleged, admitted or adjudicated status", "why_it_matters": "Establishes the claimed insider basis without treating allegations as convictions." }, { "name": "Cooperation counterpart", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Receiving investigative or judicial authority, jurisdiction and case reference", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes cooperation with justice from disclosures to unrelated audiences." }, { "name": "Cooperation state", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "reported | proposed | underway | interrupted | concluded | disputed | unknown; descriptive categories", "why_it_matters": "Supports time-specific assessment without inventing a statutory status sequence." }, { "name": "Disclosure knowledge basis", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "direct participation | direct observation | reported by others | inference | mixed | unknown", "why_it_matters": "Separates insider experience from hearsay and interpretation." }, { "name": "Claim assessment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "unassessed | independently supported | contradicted | contested | judicially assessed", "why_it_matters": "Keeps the reliability of individual claims separate from the collaborator label." }, { "name": "Protection decision", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Dated authority decision and recorded scope, or no decision evidenced", "why_it_matters": "Avoids assuming that cooperation automatically establishes protection." }, { "name": "Benefit determination", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Requested, granted, refused, varied or withdrawn benefit linked to its decision", "why_it_matters": "Separates an expectation of favourable treatment from an actual determination." }, { "name": "Role chronology", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Dated events and elapsed days, with precision and uncertainty recorded", "why_it_matters": "Allows disclosures, decisions and later changes to be assessed in sequence." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify a documented role attribution while flagging uncertain legal equivalence.", "Connect disclosures to their records, knowledge basis and independent supporting or conflicting evidence.", "Compare cooperation histories without collapsing revised accounts into a single narrative.", "Identify which protection or benefit questions require a recorded authority decision.", "Flag inconsistencies, missing evidence and review needs for qualified human assessment.", "Produce an access-appropriate role summary that excludes protected identities and operational details." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain the Italian legal and public meaning of pentito, citing legal and historical sources.", "Report on publicly known cases from court records and reputable reporting." ], "must_not": [ "Reveal or help find the identity, location or family of a protected witness.", "Label a person a pentito without court or official confirmation.", "Help organized crime groups intimidate or retaliate against collaborators.", "Present a collaborator's testimony as proven fact before a court rules." ], "requires_human": [ "Publishing any detail that could identify a collaborator under protection." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Exposure can get collaborators and their relatives killed.", "Testimony from collaborators raises questions of reliability and fairness to the accused." ], "affected_parties": [ "Collaborators and their families", "Accused people", "Victims of organized crime" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "The judicial authorities and the state witness protection service.", "master_systems": [] }, "what_it_is_for": [ "The term pentito appears in Italian reporting, historical accounts and discussion of investigations involving organised crime or terrorism.", "It describes a criminal insider who cooperates with judicial authorities, while formal legal status and protection depend on the applicable legal framework." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "Law No. 82 of 1991, enacted by the Italian Parliament, provides a framework for protecting people who cooperate with justice.", "Law No. 45 of 2001, enacted by the Italian Parliament, revised rules governing cooperation with justice, protection and related benefits." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Disclosure of a cooperator's identity or location can expose that person and relatives to retaliation.", "Uncorroborated or misleading testimony can contribute to wrongful accusations and miscarriages of justice.", "Applying the label without reliable evidence can damage reputation and compromise personal safety.", "Confusing cooperation with proven remorse or automatic entitlement to benefits can distort legal and historical interpretation." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "recognition": "Cooperation with judicial authorities is a social and legal status that cannot be established from a person's appearance." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q2032656: pentito", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2032656", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Pentito", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentito", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "pentito-role-boundaries", "name": "Pentito role boundaries", "description": "Establish what the label means in the particular record and why it applies.", "rationale": "The registry supplies no definition, and colloquial terminology cannot establish legal status.", "layers": [ { "id": "label-and-status", "name": "Label and status", "description": "Separate naming practices from documented classification.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-pentito-role", "name": "Attributed pentito role", "description": "Record who uses the term, its intended meaning and any supporting authority record.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who calls this person a pentito, and in which dated source?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-pentito-role-q01" }, { "text": "Does the term denote criminal cooperation, a formal classification or merely claimed repentance?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributed-pentito-role-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "neighbouring-roles", "name": "Neighbouring roles", "description": "Test the boundary against witnesses, informants and confessing offenders.", "findings": [ { "id": "criminal-insider-distinction", "name": "Criminal insider distinction", "description": "Require evidence of the relevant insider relationship and cooperation instead of relying on witness participation alone.", "questions": [ { "text": "What distinguishes this person's involvement from that of an uninvolved witness or victim?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "criminal-insider-distinction-q01" }, { "text": "What establishes cooperation beyond a confession or an isolated tip?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "criminal-insider-distinction-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "insider-position-and-disengagement", "name": "Insider position and disengagement", "description": "Describe the criminal context from which the person can provide information and any documented change in involvement.", "rationale": "Both access to knowledge and continuing connections affect how cooperation should be interpreted.", "layers": [ { "id": "criminal-access", "name": "Criminal access", "description": "Relate disclosed matters to the person's actual or claimed access.", "findings": [ { "id": "basis-of-insider-knowledge", "name": "Basis of insider knowledge", "description": "Connect relevant conduct, relationships and periods of involvement to the information supplied.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which activities or relationships gave the person access to the matters disclosed?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "basis-of-insider-knowledge-q01" }, { "text": "Which aspects of that involvement are alleged, admitted or adjudicated?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "basis-of-insider-knowledge-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "changed-criminal-relations", "name": "Changed criminal relations", "description": "Track documented disengagement without inferring inner remorse.", "findings": [ { "id": "disengagement-evidence", "name": "Disengagement evidence", "description": "Distinguish declared separation from evidence about subsequent conduct and contacts.", "questions": [ { "text": "What dated evidence supports or challenges the claimed break with criminal associates?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "disengagement-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Which later contacts require contextual review rather than an automatic conclusion that cooperation ended?", "kind": "action", "id": "disengagement-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "cooperation-and-disclosures", "name": "Cooperation and disclosures", "description": "Represent how cooperation began and what was supplied to authorities.", "rationale": "The role depends on concrete cooperation whose scope and sequence must remain inspectable.", "layers": [ { "id": "cooperation-entry", "name": "Cooperation entry", "description": "Identify the start, recipient and procedural context of cooperation.", "findings": [ { "id": "documented-cooperation-start", "name": "Documented cooperation start", "description": "Anchor reported cooperation to records without treating the first public report as its actual beginning.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which record establishes the earliest known cooperation with a competent authority?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "documented-cooperation-start-q01" }, { "text": "What was the person's procedural position when that cooperation began?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "documented-cooperation-start-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "disclosure-sequence", "name": "Disclosure sequence", "description": "Preserve the contents and evolution of accounts.", "findings": [ { "id": "versioned-insider-account", "name": "Versioned insider account", "description": "Track disclosures, additions, corrections and retractions as distinct dated events.", "questions": [ { "text": "What was disclosed, when, to whom and through which recorded interview or statement?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "versioned-insider-account-q01" }, { "text": "Which later statements add to, correct or retract earlier claims?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "versioned-insider-account-q02" }, { "text": "How much time elapsed between relevant events and their disclosure?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "versioned-insider-account-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidential-assessment", "name": "Evidential assessment", "description": "Evaluate the support and procedural treatment of particular disclosures.", "rationale": "Neither cooperation nor an associated benefit makes every allegation reliable or judicially accepted.", "layers": [ { "id": "knowledge-and-corroboration", "name": "Knowledge and corroboration", "description": "Separate the origin of a claim from evidence supporting it.", "findings": [ { "id": "claim-specific-support", "name": "Claim-specific support", "description": "Associate each material claim with its knowledge basis and independently assessed evidence.", "questions": [ { "text": "Did the person participate in, observe, hear about or infer the asserted event?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "claim-specific-support-q01" }, { "text": "Which evidence independently supports or contradicts this particular claim?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "claim-specific-support-q02" }, { "text": "Do apparently separate supporting accounts derive from the same original source?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "claim-specific-support-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "authority-assessment", "name": "Authority assessment", "description": "Record the limits of investigative and judicial conclusions.", "findings": [ { "id": "bounded-reliability-determination", "name": "Bounded reliability determination", "description": "Attach assessments to the deciding authority, claims, proceeding and date rather than assigning permanent personal credibility.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which authority assessed which statements, and what did its decision actually conclude?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "bounded-reliability-determination-q01" }, { "text": "Does the assessment concern admissibility, reliability, investigative usefulness or another specific issue?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "bounded-reliability-determination-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "protection-benefits-and-obligations", "name": "Protection, benefits and obligations", "description": "Keep the distinct consequences of cooperation tied to documented decisions.", "rationale": "Protection needs, favourable treatment and cooperation duties must not be inferred from one another.", "layers": [ { "id": "protection-determination", "name": "Protection determination", "description": "Record protection decisions and their authorised scope without exposing operational arrangements.", "findings": [ { "id": "documented-protection-scope", "name": "Documented protection scope", "description": "Represent protection as a separately evidenced determination; official guidance describes programme assessment and possible family inclusion. See [Direzione Nazionale Antimafia e Antiterrorismo](https://dna-dev-fd-01.azurefd.net/it/contents/collaboratori-e-testimoni-di-giustizia-e-lordinamento-penitenziario).", "questions": [ { "text": "What decision establishes protection, its effective period and the categories of people covered?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "documented-protection-scope-q01" }, { "text": "Which protection-related information may the current agent access or disclose?", "kind": "action", "id": "documented-protection-scope-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "benefits-and-conditions", "name": "Benefits and conditions", "description": "Distinguish sought advantages from granted measures and applicable duties.", "findings": [ { "id": "separate-benefit-and-duty-records", "name": "Separate benefit and duty records", "description": "Link each benefit or obligation to its own legal basis and decision, leaving unsupported eligibility unresolved.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which benefit was requested or granted, by whom and under which applicable provision?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "separate-benefit-and-duty-records-q01" }, { "text": "What recorded conditions or duties apply to that particular determination?", "kind": "definition", "id": "separate-benefit-and-duty-records-q02" }, { "text": "Which competent authority must assess an alleged breach or proposed change?", "kind": "action", "id": "separate-benefit-and-duty-records-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "role-change-and-controlled-use", "name": "Role change and controlled use", "description": "Maintain accurate historical status and govern use of sensitive role information.", "rationale": "Cooperation may change while historical labels and safety implications persist.", "layers": [ { "id": "independent-status-changes", "name": "Independent status changes", "description": "Track changes to cooperation, protection and benefits separately.", "findings": [ { "id": "dated-status-transition", "name": "Dated status transition", "description": "Preserve prior states and record what each subsequent event actually changes.", "questions": [ { "text": "What evidence establishes interruption, conclusion or resumption of cooperation?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "dated-status-transition-q01" }, { "text": "Does the event change cooperation, protection, a benefit or only public description?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "dated-status-transition-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "safe-role-representation", "name": "Safe role representation", "description": "Control identity linkage and the publication of contested or protected information.", "findings": [ { "id": "authorised-role-summary", "name": "Authorised role summary", "description": "Generate summaries that retain attribution and uncertainty while respecting documented access restrictions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which records authorise linking the role to a named person or an alias?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "authorised-role-summary-q01" }, { "text": "What may be included in this audience's summary without revealing restricted identity or protection information?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-role-summary-q02" }, { "text": "How should disputed or superseded pentito attributions be marked in downstream uses?", "kind": "action", "id": "authorised-role-summary-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 intended sense is inferred from the Italian criminal-justice term; the ordinary Italian word also means a repentant person.", "This is a social and judicial role, not an occupation requiring professional qualifications or licensing.", "A researcher should verify current Italian statutory definitions, benefit conditions and protection rules before assigning formal legal status." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of pentito 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": [ "Providing insider accounts of criminal organisations, their membership and operations.", "Giving evidence in prosecutions of organised crime or terrorism.", "Helping investigators interpret relationships, practices and events otherwise difficult to establish." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of pentito 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": [ "Retaliation against the collaborator or relatives.", "False, selective or self-serving testimony motivated by prospective benefits.", "Overreliance on insider accounts without independent corroboration.", "Public use of the label implying moral repentance that cooperation alone does not establish.", "Disclosure of protected identities or locations." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of pentito 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": [ "The term is especially associated with Italy and reporting on Mafia investigations.", "Italian legal usage distinguishes a collaboratore di giustizia from a testimone di giustizia; pentito is a popular label rather than an exact substitute for either category.", "Other jurisdictions have cooperating defendants, informants and protected witnesses, but their legal categories and eligibility rules do not map exactly onto pentito." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-regional-variation-q01", "text": "Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of pentito 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": "collaboratore di giustizia", "difference": "The formal Italian category concerns cooperation with justice under applicable law; pentito is a broader public label carrying an implication of repentance." }, { "name": "testimone di giustizia", "difference": "A justice witness gives evidence without the criminal participation characteristic of a pentito, often as a victim or eyewitness." }, { "name": "informant", "difference": "An informant supplies information and may remain covert or continue criminal involvement; the role does not necessarily involve the judicial cooperation associated with a pentito." }, { "name": "protected witness", "difference": "Protection describes security arrangements, whereas pentito describes a person's criminal background and cooperation; either status can exist without the other." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of pentito this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend the Italian criminal-justice sense exclusively, or also comparable roles in other jurisdictions and historical settings?", "Which existing Vercy models already own collaborator-of-justice, witness and criminal-informant concepts, and should this entry link to one of them?", "Which current and historical legal provisions govern the intended cases, including formal criteria, disclosure timing, benefits and review procedures?", "What minimum authoritative evidence should establish a pentito role when public descriptions and formal records differ?", "Which rules govern retention, correction and disclosure of role information after cooperation or protection changes?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 7, "layers": 13, "findings": 17, "questions": 33 } }