{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T09:24:59Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 14.9, "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-1091-7071-9dd0-55ccfc052088\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: EF 128\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: PHY.OBJ\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043: 1001 register", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 75.5, "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-1091-76d2-b5d3-2a4ff826f156\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: EF 128\nRegistry id: vr.tr.ef-128\nPlane / domain: PHY / PHY.OBJ\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\nContext fo" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:54:58+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "visual_identification" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:30+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q324019", "registryId": "vr.tr.ef-128", "name": "EF 128", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "PHY.OBJ" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q324019/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.ef-128", "name": "EF 128", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise the Junkers EF 128 aircraft proposal, assess the evidence for its design and development state, and decide which descriptions or comparisons are justified.", "definition": "The Junkers EF 128 was a German single-engine jet fighter design proposed near the end of the Second World War that remained an unbuilt project.", "scope_statement": "This model owns the aircraft design identity registered as vr.tr.ef-128 in PHY / PHY.OBJ, including configuration proposals, intended capabilities and evidence of physical realisation; the identification follows [Wikidata Q324019](https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q324019), which describes EF 128 as a proposed jet fighter and gives Junkers EF 128 as an alias.", "in_scope": [ "EF 128 designation, Junkers attribution and documentary identity", "Dated configuration proposals and their relationship to the registered design", "Airframe, propulsion, crew and equipment arrangements as proposed", "Performance requirements and estimates with their assumptions", "Evidence distinguishing design work, test articles, mock-ups and completed aircraft", "Uncertainty and permissible uses of reconstructed EF 128 information" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Jet fighters as a general aircraft class", "Other Junkers projects or competing fighter designs", "The Junkers organisation and the wider procurement programme", "Engine and weapon designs except their proposed integration into EF 128", "Individual museum exhibits, replicas and model kits as physical objects", "Fictional operational histories and modern flight authorisation" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "Require an EF 128 designation and Junkers attribution supported by a document or traceable catalogue record; the number 128 alone is insufficient.", "Distinguish the proposed aircraft design from an operational aircraft type by recording evidence of development maturity separately from intended capability.", "Use an attributable configuration drawing to establish identity; a generic swept-wing jet silhouette is insufficient.", "Treat an exhibit, kit or rendering labelled EF 128 as a representation until its relationship to original project evidence is established." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Documented designation", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "EF 128; Junkers EF 128; other forms only with provenance", "why_it_matters": "Connects records without treating every similar project number as the same design." }, { "name": "Configuration baseline", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Dated drawing, report or proposal identifying a specific revision", "why_it_matters": "Prevents dimensions and equipment from incompatible proposals being combined." }, { "name": "Development maturity", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Proposal; documented design work; test article; mock-up; completed airframe; flight-tested; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Each claimed stage requires its own evidence and does not follow automatically from the preceding stage." }, { "name": "Airframe geometry", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Span and length in m; wing area in m²; sweep in degrees with reference line", "why_it_matters": "Supports recognition and comparison only when tied to a particular EF 128 baseline." }, { "name": "Proposed powerplant", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Engine designation, revision, count and installation source; unresolved where undocumented", "why_it_matters": "Separates an intended engine installation from a delivered or tested installation." }, { "name": "Performance evidence", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Requirement; contemporary calculation; ground-test result; flight-test result; later reconstruction; unknown", "why_it_matters": "Prevents estimated EF 128 performance from being represented as demonstrated." }, { "name": "Speed and altitude pair", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "km/h with altitude in m, atmospheric assumptions and configuration", "why_it_matters": "A speed claim cannot be compared meaningfully without its operating conditions and evidence class." }, { "name": "Representation relationship", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "Original drawing; contemporary test article; contemporary mock-up; later replica; kit; illustration; unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Prevents surviving representations from being counted as completed aircraft." } ], "affordances": [ "Match an EF 128 reference to the registered design using designation and documentary provenance.", "Compare proposed configurations while preserving revision boundaries.", "Classify performance figures as requirements, estimates or measurements.", "Assess whether a pictured object represents the design or constitutes evidence of contemporary construction.", "Identify conflicting claims and request the primary document needed to resolve them.", "Prepare a qualified catalogue description that exposes unresolved development and configuration claims." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Describe this unbuilt jet fighter project from documents and drawings, citing sources.", "Distinguish documented design data from later reconstructions and models." ], "must_not": [ "Present models or speculative reconstructions as built or flown aircraft.", "Invent performance figures for an unbuilt design.", "Promote myths of secret wonder weapons as fact." ], "requires_human": [ "Publishing claims that parts of the project were built." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Myths about late-war projects glamorize a criminal regime.", "Fabricated history spreads quickly among enthusiasts." ], "affected_parties": [ "Historians", "Model makers and enthusiasts", "Readers" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody: it was never built; archives hold the design records.", "master_systems": [] }, "visual_identification": [ "Known only from drawings, wind tunnel models and later replicas.", "Swept-wing jet layout with air intakes on the fuselage sides in drawings." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Speculative reconstructions are mistaken for history.", "Myths about such projects feed historical misinformation." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "This unbuilt jet fighter proposal is encountered in studies of late Second World War aircraft development.", "Its surviving design documentation supports historical comparison and reconstruction of proposed features, while providing no evidence of demonstrated flight performance." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "interfaces": "Operational aircraft certification standards are not applicable to this unbuilt historical proposal as a documentary design." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q324019: EF 128", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q324019", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Junkers EF 128", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_EF_128", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "designation-and-project-boundary", "name": "Designation and project boundary", "description": "Establish which records belong to the Junkers EF 128 proposal.", "rationale": "A short experimental designation can conflate an aircraft proposal, a design revision and a later representation.", "layers": [ { "id": "designation-evidence", "name": "Designation evidence", "description": "Connect EF 128 names to attributable project records.", "findings": [ { "id": "project-name-attribution", "name": "Project name attribution", "description": "Record the exact designation and Junkers attribution used by each source without silently normalising uncertain prefixes.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which contemporary document explicitly connects the EF 128 designation to Junkers?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "project-name-attribution-q01" }, { "text": "Which expanded or prefixed names are contemporary designations and which are later catalogue conventions?", "kind": "definition", "id": "project-name-attribution-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "revision-membership", "name": "Revision membership", "description": "Determine which proposed configurations remain part of the same registered thing.", "findings": [ { "id": "configuration-family-boundary", "name": "Configuration family boundary", "description": "Associate claimed EF 128 revisions with explicit documents rather than creating separate registered things from later illustrations.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which dated proposals establish distinct EF 128 configurations?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "configuration-family-boundary-q01" }, { "text": "Do claims of alternative crew arrangements or mission versions describe documented revisions, related projects or later speculation?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "configuration-family-boundary-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "proposed-aircraft-configuration", "name": "Proposed aircraft configuration", "description": "Capture the physical arrangement needed to recognise and interpret an EF 128 proposal.", "rationale": "An aircraft proposal must be reconstructed from mutually consistent design evidence rather than a composite of published specifications.", "layers": [ { "id": "airframe-and-control-layout", "name": "Airframe and control layout", "description": "Establish wing, fuselage, stabilising surfaces and flight-control arrangements for each baseline.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributable-geometry", "name": "Attributable geometry", "description": "Resolve the reported swept-wing, tailless configuration against original drawings before treating detailed geometry as settled.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which original drawing establishes EF 128 wing planform, vertical surfaces and the presence or absence of a separate horizontal tail?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributable-geometry-q01" }, { "text": "What dimensions and sweep reference line belong to that drawing, and are they stated or inferred from scale?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "attributable-geometry-q02" }, { "text": "How does the same baseline assign pitch, roll and yaw control?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributable-geometry-q03" } ] } ] }, { "id": "propulsion-and-occupied-spaces", "name": "Propulsion and occupied spaces", "description": "Relate the proposed engine installation to intake routing, crew space and equipment allocation.", "findings": [ { "id": "installation-baseline", "name": "Installation baseline", "description": "Keep proposed powerplant, crew complement and equipment arrangements attached to the configuration that specifies them.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which primary record confirms or corrects the reported HeS 011 engine selection for EF 128?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "installation-baseline-q01" }, { "text": "What intake, exhaust, cockpit and equipment arrangement is shown in that same configuration?", "kind": "definition", "id": "installation-baseline-q02" }, { "text": "Which equipment items were baseline provisions and which were optional proposals?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "installation-baseline-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "requirements-and-performance-evidence", "name": "Requirements and performance evidence", "description": "Separate what EF 128 was intended to achieve from what its design evidence supports.", "rationale": "Projected fighter performance can otherwise be mistaken for measured capability.", "layers": [ { "id": "mission-and-selection", "name": "Mission and selection", "description": "Establish the requirement and procurement context to which an EF 128 proposal responded.", "findings": [ { "id": "requirement-traceability", "name": "Requirement traceability", "description": "Attach intended role and selection claims to dated requirements or decisions.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which contemporary requirement identifies the intended EF 128 mission and evaluation criteria?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "requirement-traceability-q01" }, { "text": "What evidence distinguishes submission, favourable evaluation, development authorisation and production approval?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "requirement-traceability-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "conditional-performance", "name": "Conditional performance", "description": "Record speed, climb, range and ceiling claims with their calculation or test basis.", "findings": [ { "id": "performance-claim-status", "name": "Performance claim status", "description": "Preserve the provenance, configuration and conditions of each figure rather than assigning the proposal an unconditional operating envelope.", "questions": [ { "text": "For each EF 128 performance figure, is the source a requirement, contemporary estimate, test result or later reconstruction?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "performance-claim-status-q01" }, { "text": "What altitude, mass, thrust assumption and fuel load accompany the figure?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "performance-claim-status-q02" }, { "text": "Which comparisons with other fighter proposals remain valid when evidence classes and conditions are matched?", "kind": "action", "id": "performance-claim-status-q03" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "realisation-and-representation", "name": "Realisation and representation", "description": "Determine how far EF 128 progressed and what surviving objects or depictions can establish.", "rationale": "A proposal, wind-tunnel article, mock-up and completed aircraft support different conclusions about existence and capability.", "layers": [ { "id": "development-milestones", "name": "Development milestones", "description": "Assess evidence for design completion, fabrication, testing and project termination.", "findings": [ { "id": "physical-realisation-evidence", "name": "Physical realisation evidence", "description": "Evaluate each claimed construction or test milestone independently; an intended aircraft does not establish a completed airframe.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which contemporary records establish whether EF 128 test models, mock-ups or full-size airframe components were actually produced?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "physical-realisation-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What is the latest securely documented project milestone, and what remains unknown after it?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "physical-realisation-evidence-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "depictions-and-agent-use", "name": "Depictions and agent use", "description": "Classify EF 128 images and exhibits before using them as historical evidence.", "findings": [ { "id": "representation-authenticity", "name": "Representation authenticity", "description": "Require provenance for images and objects, and label reconstructed details separately from documented design content.", "questions": [ { "text": "Who created the EF 128 depiction or object, when, and from which project documents?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "representation-authenticity-q01" }, { "text": "Which visible features are documented and which were supplied by a modeller or illustrator?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "representation-authenticity-q02" }, { "text": "May the agent use this item for identification, dimensional inference or only an explicitly labelled illustration?", "kind": "action", "id": "representation-authenticity-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": [ "Identification assumes the bare registry label refers to the Junkers aircraft project.", "Proposed configuration, engine selection and performance figures require checking against specialist aircraft histories; projected performance must not be presented as measured performance.", "No sources were consulted for this recall-based description." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of EF 128 this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-identifiers", "name": "Identifiers and schemes", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ { "scheme": "Junkers project designation", "value_or_pattern": "EF 128", "note": "Identifies an aircraft design project, not an individual aircraft or a production type." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-identifiers-q01", "text": "Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of EF 128 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": [ "Proposed for a Luftwaffe fighter requirement; it did not enter operational service." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of EF 128 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": "Junkers EF 126", "difference": "A separate pulsejet-powered aircraft project; EF 128 was a turbojet fighter proposal." }, { "name": "Heinkel He 162", "difference": "A German jet fighter that reached production and operational service, whereas EF 128 remained unbuilt." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of EF 128 this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Which accessible original Junkers drawings or contemporary reports establish a reliable EF 128 configuration baseline?", "What physical work was completed, particularly given differing claims about drawing-board status, wind-tunnel models and fuselage mock-ups?", "Which engine installation, control arrangement, crew complement and equipment provisions are documented rather than reconstructed?", "Which published dimensions and performance figures trace to contemporary calculations, and what assumptions accompanied them?", "What documentary evidence establishes procurement decisions, termination chronology and any claimed alternative mission versions?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 9, "findings": 12, "questions": 24 } }