{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T09:25:39Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 24.6, "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: 01a094ee-806a-70a0-a2e5-0bf1ffb252bc\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: effective field theory\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: INF.KNW\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 04", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 86.5, "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: 01a094ee-805d-7501-9b0a-5490b443e0df\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: effective field theory\nRegistry id: vr.tr.effective-field-theory\nPlane / domain: INF / INF.KNW\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:45:54+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q281778", "registryId": "vr.tr.effective-field-theory", "name": "effective field theory", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "INF.KNW" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q281778/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.effective-field-theory", "name": "effective field theory", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise an effective field theory, assess whether its expansion supports a proposed prediction, and determine what evidence or calculation is needed before using it.", "definition": "Effective field theory is a framework for describing physical phenomena within a specified range of scales using the relevant degrees of freedom and symmetry-allowed interactions, with unresolved physics encoded in coefficients organized by a systematic expansion.", "scope_statement": "This model owns vr.tr.effective-field-theory in INF / INF.KNW as a framework for constructing field descriptions valid within specified regimes, including the information needed to assess particular EFT formulations; physical systems, individual applications and research institutions remain linked entities.", "in_scope": [ "Regimes of validity, retained degrees of freedom and unresolved physics", "Symmetry assumptions, effective actions and operator bases", "Power counting, expansion parameters and truncation choices", "Matching, coefficient determination and renormalization conventions", "Observable predictions, uncertainty estimates and breakdown evidence", "Boundaries and methodological relationships with neighbouring theoretical frameworks" ], "out_of_scope": [ "The physical systems and experimental apparatus described by an EFT", "Complete microscopic or ultraviolet theories considered independently of their matching relationships", "General quantum field theory techniques without an EFT-specific role", "Mean-field approximations and empirical fits lacking an EFT expansion", "Practitioners, institutions, journals and publications as independently managed entities" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A formulation identifies the degrees of freedom appropriate to a stated regime and explains how unresolved physics enters its parameters or interactions.", "A formulation provides power counting that orders contributions and makes a finite truncation meaningful for specified observables.", "An EFT can obtain coefficients through matching or empirical determination; a known ultraviolet completion is not a prerequisite.", "The presence of operators with negative-mass-dimension couplings does not by itself disqualify an EFT: assess consistency at the stated expansion order.", "The word 'effective' alone is insufficient: a mean-field approximation, fitted potential or effective action needs additional evidence of regime-dependent organization to qualify." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Formulation route", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Matching from a specified parent theory; symmetry-based construction; mixed; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Determines which assumptions and coefficient constraints can be justified." }, { "name": "Validity regime", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Specified ranges of energy, momentum, frequency, density or background conditions, with units and exclusions", "why_it_matters": "Controls whether a proposed use falls within the formulation's supported domain." }, { "name": "Breakdown scale", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Energy, momentum or inverse-length scale with units, estimation method and uncertainty; possibly multiple scales", "why_it_matters": "Sets the reference against which omitted effects and expansion parameters are assessed." }, { "name": "Expansion parameters", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Dimensionless ratios or couplings, definitions and values in the proposed regime", "why_it_matters": "Exposes whether the chosen ordering is plausibly controlled." }, { "name": "Retained degrees of freedom", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Fields or modes, quantum numbers, kinematic scaling and links to represented excitations", "why_it_matters": "Identifies what the EFT describes explicitly and what it encodes indirectly." }, { "name": "Symmetry realization", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named symmetries with exact, approximate or broken status and linear or nonlinear realization where applicable", "why_it_matters": "Constrains allowed interactions and distinguishes alternative formulations." }, { "name": "Power-counting prescription", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Named or explicitly defined ordering of operators, derivatives, masses, loops and enhanced contributions", "why_it_matters": "Determines which terms must be retained together." }, { "name": "Calculation order", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Explicit powers retained in each expansion, loop order and any resummed terms", "why_it_matters": "Makes accuracy claims interpretable across calculations." }, { "name": "Coefficient specification", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Operator-associated values or distributions with dimensions, normalization, scale, scheme and determination source", "why_it_matters": "Prevents combining coefficients that use incompatible conventions." }, { "name": "Predictive support", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Unassessed; internally checked; calibrated; independently tested; challenged, with observable-specific evidence", "why_it_matters": "Separates successful parameter fitting from evidence for predictive reliability." } ], "affordances": [ "Classify a proposed formulation as an EFT and explain the evidence for that classification.", "Check whether a requested observable and kinematic regime are supported by the retained modes and expansion.", "Identify missing operators, coefficient inputs or calculations required at a target order.", "Compare formulations after accounting for basis, scale, scheme and power-counting conventions.", "Separate calibration inputs from validation evidence and assess stated prediction uncertainties.", "Recommend a higher-order calculation, additional matching, new degrees of freedom or a restricted use domain when justified." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain effective field theory and how it is used across particle, nuclear and condensed-matter physics.", "Help check the power counting and symmetry assumptions in a stated model." ], "must_not": [ "Present results outside a theory's range of validity as reliable.", "Claim new physics discoveries from fits without proper uncertainty.", "Copy derivations from published works without credit." ], "requires_human": [ "Publishing new physical claims under a person's name." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Overstated physics claims can mislead the public and funding decisions." ], "affected_parties": [ "Students", "Physicists", "The public" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns it; it is a framework of theoretical physics.", "master_systems": [] }, "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Truncating the expansion too early gives misleading predictions.", "Applying it beyond its cutoff scale gives meaningless results." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q281778: effective field theory", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q281778", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Effective field theory", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_field_theory", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "eft-identity-and-boundaries", "name": "EFT identity and boundaries", "description": "Establish what the registry concept covers and whether a particular formulation instantiates it.", "rationale": "The label can refer to a general method, a named theory family or a specific truncation, which require different judgments.", "layers": [ { "id": "framework-and-formulation", "name": "Framework and formulation", "description": "Separate the general concept from particular mathematical realizations.", "findings": [ { "id": "referent-and-construction-route", "name": "Referent and construction route", "description": "Record whether the subject is the general EFT framework, a family or a specified formulation, together with how it is constructed.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does this usage denote the EFT framework, a named family or a formulation with specified fields and order?", "kind": "definition", "id": "referent-and-construction-route-q01" }, { "text": "Is the formulation derived from a parent theory, constructed from symmetries and scales, or assembled through both routes?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "referent-and-construction-route-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "neighbouring-methods-and-literature", "name": "Neighbouring methods and literature", "description": "Make methodological boundaries explicit and link their supporting literature.", "findings": [ { "id": "eft-recognition-evidence", "name": "EFT recognition evidence", "description": "Use explicit construction and ordering evidence to distinguish EFT from looser uses of 'effective'; methodological anchors include [Burgess's introduction](https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0701053) and [MIT's EFT course](https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/8-851-effective-field-theory-spring-2013/download/).", "questions": [ { "text": "What establishes an EFT interpretation beyond the appearance of an effective action, fitted interaction or mean-field approximation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "eft-recognition-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "Which reference defines the convention used here, and does it treat EFT as a method, a subject area or a particular theory?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "eft-recognition-evidence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "scales-modes-and-validity", "name": "Scales, modes and validity", "description": "Describe the physical resolution and conditions under which the formulation is intended to work.", "rationale": "An EFT cannot be assessed independently of its scales, retained modes and application regime.", "layers": [ { "id": "scale-hierarchy", "name": "Scale hierarchy", "description": "Identify relevant physical scales and distinguish them from computational conventions.", "findings": [ { "id": "validity-window-and-breakdown", "name": "Validity window and breakdown", "description": "Record the proposed validity window, evidence for its limits and the separate roles of breakdown, regulator and renormalization scales.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which external and background scales define the proposed application, and what dimensionless ratios characterize their hierarchy?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "validity-window-and-breakdown-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence supports the breakdown scale, and how is it distinguished from the regulator cutoff and renormalization scale?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "validity-window-and-breakdown-q02" }, { "text": "Which thresholds or changes of background require reassessing the validity window?", "kind": "action", "id": "validity-window-and-breakdown-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "mode-content", "name": "Mode content", "description": "Explain the choice of explicit fields and the treatment of excluded modes.", "findings": [ { "id": "retained-and-eliminated-modes", "name": "Retained and eliminated modes", "description": "Record explicit excitations and any excluded modes, including their momentum scaling and the justification for eliminating them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which fields or momentum regions remain explicit, and what physical excitations do they represent?", "kind": "definition", "id": "retained-and-eliminated-modes-q01" }, { "text": "Which modes are integrated out or otherwise excluded, and what supports that choice in this regime?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "retained-and-eliminated-modes-q02" }, { "text": "If distinct mode sectors overlap, how is double counting prevented?", "kind": "action", "id": "retained-and-eliminated-modes-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "symmetries-and-operator-content", "name": "Symmetries and operator content", "description": "Specify the principles and conventions governing the effective action.", "rationale": "Predictions depend on which interactions are allowed, retained or removed as redundant.", "layers": [ { "id": "symmetry-assumptions", "name": "Symmetry assumptions", "description": "Identify symmetries and the treatment of their breaking.", "findings": [ { "id": "symmetry-realization-and-breaking", "name": "Symmetry realization and breaking", "description": "Record transformation rules, symmetry-breaking assumptions and consistency conditions relevant to the operator construction.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which spacetime, gauge and global symmetries constrain this formulation, and how are they realized?", "kind": "definition", "id": "symmetry-realization-and-breaking-q01" }, { "text": "Which breaking terms, background fields or spurions are admitted, and what fixes their assigned order?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "symmetry-realization-and-breaking-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "operator-basis", "name": "Operator basis", "description": "Specify independent interactions and the equivalence relations used to select them.", "findings": [ { "id": "basis-completeness-and-conventions", "name": "Basis completeness and conventions", "description": "Record the retained operator set, normalization conventions and evidence that the basis is sufficient at the claimed order.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which operators are retained, and how is completeness checked under the stated symmetries and power counting?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "basis-completeness-and-conventions-q01" }, { "text": "Which redundancies are removed using integration by parts, equations of motion or field redefinitions?", "kind": "definition", "id": "basis-completeness-and-conventions-q02" }, { "text": "What coefficient transformations and normalization changes are required before comparing with another basis?", "kind": "action", "id": "basis-completeness-and-conventions-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "power-counting-and-truncation", "name": "Power counting and truncation", "description": "Explain how contributions are ranked and which calculations support an accuracy claim.", "rationale": "A finite operator list becomes useful only when its omission and inclusion rules are justified.", "layers": [ { "id": "expansion-organization", "name": "Expansion organization", "description": "Record the ordering prescription for all relevant small parameters.", "findings": [ { "id": "counting-rules-and-enhancements", "name": "Counting rules and enhancements", "description": "Specify how derivatives, masses, fields, couplings and loops contribute to order, including any promoted terms.", "questions": [ { "text": "What are the expansion parameters, and how do operators and loop contributions scale in them?", "kind": "definition", "id": "counting-rules-and-enhancements-q01" }, { "text": "Do large logarithms, shallow bound states, resonances or other enhancements require promotion or resummation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "counting-rules-and-enhancements-q02" }, { "text": "Which coefficient-size assumptions are used, and what evidence could challenge them?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "counting-rules-and-enhancements-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "order-consistency", "name": "Order consistency", "description": "Relate the requested observable to a complete calculation at a stated order.", "findings": [ { "id": "retained-and-omitted-contributions", "name": "Retained and omitted contributions", "description": "Record the contributions included in the observable and the first omitted orders, including interactions between expansions.", "questions": [ { "text": "What explicit powers and loop orders are included, beyond labels such as leading or next-to-leading order?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "retained-and-omitted-contributions-q01" }, { "text": "Are interference terms, squared corrections and counterterms treated consistently at the claimed observable order?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "retained-and-omitted-contributions-q02" }, { "text": "Which additional contributions are required to reach the requested accuracy?", "kind": "action", "id": "retained-and-omitted-contributions-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "matching-coefficients-and-running", "name": "Matching, coefficients and running", "description": "Track how EFT parameters are determined and transported between scales.", "rationale": "Coefficient values are meaningful only with their origin, conventions and evolution attached.", "layers": [ { "id": "coefficient-determination", "name": "Coefficient determination", "description": "Identify the information used to constrain the effective interactions.", "findings": [ { "id": "matching-or-calibration-record", "name": "Matching or calibration record", "description": "Record matching conditions or calibration inputs, their precision and unresolved parameter combinations.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which coefficients come from parent-theory matching, numerical calculations, experimental fits or assumptions?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "matching-or-calibration-record-q01" }, { "text": "Which amplitudes or observables determine them, at what scale and perturbative or expansion order?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "matching-or-calibration-record-q02" }, { "text": "Which coefficient combinations remain unconstrained, correlated or dependent on priors?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "matching-or-calibration-record-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "renormalization-and-thresholds", "name": "Renormalization and thresholds", "description": "Track scale dependence, operator mixing and changes in active modes.", "findings": [ { "id": "consistent-scale-transport", "name": "Consistent scale transport", "description": "Record renormalization conventions and the steps needed to use parameters at the calculation scale.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which regulator, subtraction scheme, renormalization scale and operator-mixing conventions define these coefficients?", "kind": "definition", "id": "consistent-scale-transport-q01" }, { "text": "What running and threshold matching are required between coefficient determination and prediction?", "kind": "action", "id": "consistent-scale-transport-q02" }, { "text": "Does residual scale or regulator dependence behave consistently with the retained order and stated uncertainty?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "consistent-scale-transport-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "predictions-uncertainty-and-use", "name": "Predictions, uncertainty and use", "description": "Connect the formulation to testable outputs and justified decisions.", "rationale": "An agent needs observable-specific evidence before recommending use, refinement or replacement.", "layers": [ { "id": "observable-support", "name": "Observable support", "description": "Specify predictions and separate their uncertainty sources.", "findings": [ { "id": "prediction-and-error-budget", "name": "Prediction and error budget", "description": "Record the observable, applicable conditions and uncertainty contributions without treating a single diagnostic as a complete error estimate.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which observable, kinematic cuts and background assumptions define the prediction?", "kind": "definition", "id": "prediction-and-error-budget-q01" }, { "text": "How is truncation uncertainty estimated, and which assumptions support that estimate?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "prediction-and-error-budget-q02" }, { "text": "How are coefficient, numerical, experimental-input and truncation uncertainties distinguished and combined?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "prediction-and-error-budget-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "validation-and-revision", "name": "Validation and revision", "description": "Determine whether evidence supports continued use or a change of formulation.", "findings": [ { "id": "independent-tests-and-use-decisions", "name": "Independent tests and use decisions", "description": "Record independent comparisons, order-by-order behavior and observable-specific conditions for revising the EFT.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which comparisons test predictions independently of the data used to determine coefficients?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "independent-tests-and-use-decisions-q01" }, { "text": "Do successive orders and discrepancies behave as expected from the proposed expansion within the claimed regime?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "independent-tests-and-use-decisions-q02" }, { "text": "What evidence warrants restricting the regime, recalibrating coefficients, adding orders or introducing new explicit modes?", "kind": "action", "id": "independent-tests-and-use-decisions-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 term denotes both a framework and an individual theory constructed within it; the registry records no sense distinction.", "Validity scales, coefficient conventions, and uncertainty procedures must be checked for each specific effective theory.", "No classification identifiers or formal standards are supplied because none are confidently recalled for this concept." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of effective field theory 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": [ "Chiral effective field theory", "Pionless effective field theory", "Heavy-quark effective theory", "Nonrelativistic quantum chromodynamics", "Soft-collinear effective theory", "Standard Model effective field theory" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of effective field theory 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": [ "Calculating low-energy hadron interactions and nuclear properties with systematic uncertainty estimates.", "Describing hadrons containing heavy quarks and predicting their decays.", "Organizing collider calculations involving energetic particles and separated momentum scales.", "Constraining possible physics beyond the Standard Model through higher-dimensional interactions.", "Describing long-wavelength collective excitations in condensed matter." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of effective field theory 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": "Expansion parameter", "typical_range": "Smaller than one in a controlled expansion; its precise form and acceptable size depend on the theory and required accuracy.", "unit": "Dimensionless" }, { "quantity": "Breakdown scale", "typical_range": "Theory-dependent; set by omitted degrees of freedom or dynamics that invalidate the chosen expansion.", "unit": "Energy or momentum, commonly eV, MeV, or GeV" }, { "quantity": "Wilson coefficients or low-energy constants", "typical_range": "Determined by matching, measurements, or other calculations; no universal range.", "unit": "Depends on operator dimension and normalization" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of effective field theory 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": [ "Applying the theory near or beyond its breakdown scale can invalidate predictions and uncertainty estimates.", "Omitting relevant degrees of freedom or interactions can spoil the expansion.", "Using inconsistent power counting or renormalization can prevent systematic improvement.", "Neglecting truncation errors, parameter correlations, or operator degeneracies can produce misleading constraints.", "Assuming coefficient sizes from naturalness alone can miss fine tuning or enhanced interactions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of effective field theory 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": "Quantum field theory", "difference": "Quantum field theory is the broader formalism; an effective field theory specifies a domain of validity and organizes contributions according to a scale expansion." }, { "name": "Renormalization group", "difference": "The renormalization group describes how a theory's parameters change with scale; effective field theory uses this machinery to construct and connect descriptions valid at different scales." }, { "name": "Phenomenological model", "difference": "A phenomenological model need not have systematic power counting or controlled truncation errors, whereas those are central aims of effective field theory." }, { "name": "Ultraviolet completion", "difference": "An ultraviolet completion supplies a description at higher energies that can reproduce the effective theory at lower energies." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of effective field theory this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend effective field theory primarily as a methodology, a field of knowledge or a class of formulations, and does an existing world model already own that concept?", "Which defining references and classification conventions should anchor its INF.KNW placement without treating courses, publications or practitioners as the thing itself?", "How broadly should this entry cover classical, thermal, open-system and nonlocal effective descriptions, and what recognition criteria remain valid across them?", "What minimum evidence should distinguish an EFT with an unresolved error estimate from an effective model that has no justified systematic expansion?", "Which named EFT families need linked application models, and which differences can be represented within this shared model without duplicating their subject matter?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 7, "layers": 13, "findings": 18, "questions": 39 } }