{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T08:56:10Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 18.5, "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: 01a094d3-ed5e-7d13-b0f6-d31187d7f56c\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: Cupid's bow\nSense to describe: (none recorded)\nDomain code: XCT.QLT\nAlso known as: (none)\n\n\nContext for this batch of 1001 things:\n# Batch 043: 1001 reg", "usd": 0.0, "recall": true }, "codex": { "seconds": 59.2, "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: 01a094d3-ed68-7641-a5a7-48169080c95e\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: Cupid's bow\nRegistry id: vr.tr.cupid-s-bow\nPlane / domain: XCT / XCT.QLT\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into this entry: (none)\n\n\n" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:42:53+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "visual_identification" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:31+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q474053", "registryId": "vr.tr.cupid-s-bow", "name": "Cupid's bow", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "XCT.QLT" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q474053/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.cupid-s-bow", "name": "Cupid's bow", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise, describe and compare a Cupid's bow as an upper-lip contour while keeping anatomical observations separate from cosmetic appearance and aesthetic judgments.", "definition": "Cupid's bow is the double-curved central contour of the upper lip's vermilion border, formed by two peaks flanking a midline depression and named for its resemblance to an archer's bow.", "scope_statement": "This model provisionally owns the paired peaks and intervening central depression of the upper lip's vermilion border, including how that contour is observed and represented; the intended anatomical sense requires confirmation because the registry supplies no definition.", "in_scope": [ "Identification of the upper-lip border segment called Cupid's bow", "Paired peak and central depression landmarks, including indistinct or unresolvable landmarks", "Contour prominence, curvature and left-right correspondence", "Observation conditions that affect apparent contour", "Differences between anatomical contour and cosmetic or depicted outline", "Attributed terminology and aesthetic judgments about this specific feature" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Cupid's mythological weapon and its symbolic meanings", "Whole-lip anatomy, volume and function", "The philtrum as a complete anatomical structure", "Diagnosis and treatment of congenital or acquired lip conditions", "General facial attractiveness assessment", "Procedural planning for injections, surgery or permanent cosmetics" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "The candidate feature follows the central upper-lip vermilion border rather than the mouth opening between the lips.", "The defining contour is organised around two lateral peaks and a central depression; poorly resolved landmarks must remain uncertain rather than be forced into that pattern.", "It is a border contour rather than the philtral groove or the vertical ridges above the lip.", "A painted bow-shaped outline is a representation or alteration of apparent contour and does not establish the position of the underlying anatomical border.", "A reference to an archer's weapon or Cupid's iconography belongs to a different sense of the name." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Referent sense", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "anatomical contour | cosmetic outline | depicted contour | mythological weapon | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Prevents a model built from an undefined registry label from silently mixing different referents." }, { "name": "Landmark resolvability", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "both peaks and depression resolved | partially resolved | unresolved", "why_it_matters": "Determines whether contour measurements are defensible." }, { "name": "Interpeak span", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "millimetres with calibration, or dimensionless ratio to a declared reference length", "why_it_matters": "Records peak separation without confusing image size with anatomical size." }, { "name": "Central depression depth", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "perpendicular distance from the central depression to the line joining the peaks; millimetres or a declared normalised ratio", "why_it_matters": "Provides a proposed operational measure of bow prominence whose landmark and projection conventions must be stated." }, { "name": "Left-right contour correspondence", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "peak offsets and contour differences relative to a declared midline, in calibrated or normalised coordinates", "why_it_matters": "Makes apparent asymmetry inspectable without treating it as a defect." }, { "name": "Observation configuration", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "declared head pose, lip posture, viewing angle, lighting and image processing", "why_it_matters": "Helps distinguish contour differences from changes in how the feature was observed." }, { "name": "Visible outline relationship", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "visible outline coincides with anatomical border | displaced by cosmetics | depiction only | uncertain", "why_it_matters": "Separates the feature itself from its visual presentation." }, { "name": "Contour appraisal", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "judgment linked to its speaker, terminology, context and reference example", "why_it_matters": "Keeps descriptions such as pronounced or desirable attributable rather than universal." } ], "affordances": [ "Resolve whether a reference concerns upper-lip anatomy, a cosmetic outline or another sense of Cupid's bow.", "Annotate the two peaks and central depression with explicit uncertainty.", "Compare contour observations when pose, scale and landmark conventions permit.", "Flag a cosmetic outline that cannot reliably identify the anatomical border.", "Request a clearer or more comparable observation before making a contour claim.", "Record an individual's preferred cosmetic depiction without converting that preference into an anatomical norm." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Describe the Cupid's bow as an anatomical feature in neutral terms.", "Explain its relevance to cleft lip repair and facial anatomy from medical sources." ], "must_not": [ "Rate, rank or comment on a person's lips or attractiveness from their images.", "Collect or analyse facial images to identify people without consent.", "Promote cosmetic procedures to a user who has not asked about them.", "Mock people whose lip shape differs, including after cleft lip surgery." ], "requires_human": [ "Any advice about cosmetic or reconstructive surgery for a person." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Facial features touch identity and self-image; comments on them can hurt.", "Beauty ideals around lips drive pressure toward cosmetic procedures." ], "affected_parties": [ "People with cleft lip", "People concerned about their appearance", "Young people" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody: part of the human face; each person's own body is theirs.", "master_systems": [] }, "visual_identification": [ "The two peaks and central dip along the top edge of the upper lip, below the groove under the nose." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Poorly performed lip fillers or surgery can distort it and cause lasting harm." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "Cupid's bow is encountered when describing the central contour of the human upper lip in anatomy, portraiture and facial assessment.", "It serves as a visible landmark in cosmetic design and reconstructive planning, with natural variation in symmetry and prominence." ], "facets_not_applicable": { "interfaces": "No standard, law or official classification directly applies to Cupid's bow as a naturally varying anatomical contour." } }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q474053: Cupid's bow", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q474053", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Cupid's bow", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupid%27s_bow", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "referent-and-anatomical-boundary", "name": "Referent and anatomical boundary", "description": "Establish which sense of Cupid's bow is intended and which upper-lip feature it denotes.", "rationale": "The undefined label can refer to anatomy or a mythological object, and the anatomical feature is easily conflated with adjacent structures.", "layers": [ { "id": "name-and-sense", "name": "Name and sense", "description": "Resolve the anatomical interpretation without treating the registry classification as proof.", "findings": [ { "id": "intended-referent", "name": "Intended referent", "description": "Record evidence for the intended sense; the upper-lip interpretation remains provisional until registry provenance is checked.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the originating registry record identify the upper-lip contour, Cupid's weapon or another referent?", "kind": "definition", "id": "intended-referent-q01" }, { "text": "Which originating identifier, description or reference supports that interpretation?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "intended-referent-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "border-and-neighbours", "name": "Border and neighbours", "description": "Locate the contour relative to the vermilion border, philtrum and mouth opening.", "findings": [ { "id": "owned-contour-segment", "name": "Owned contour segment", "description": "Specify the central upper-lip border segment under discussion and distinguish it from nearby surfaces, ridges and openings.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which endpoints delimit Cupid's bow in the anatomical convention being used?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "owned-contour-segment-q01" }, { "text": "Does the annotation follow the vermilion border rather than the philtral ridges or the line between the lips?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "owned-contour-segment-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "bow-landmarks-and-geometry", "name": "Bow landmarks and geometry", "description": "Describe the paired peaks, intervening depression and contour connecting them.", "rationale": "Recognition and comparison depend on this particular landmark arrangement rather than general lip fullness or facial shape.", "layers": [ { "id": "peak-and-depression-identification", "name": "Peak and depression identification", "description": "Establish whether the expected contour landmarks can actually be located.", "findings": [ { "id": "landmark-evidence", "name": "Landmark evidence", "description": "Record candidate peak and depression positions with uncertainty, allowing indistinct contours without imposing artificial landmarks.", "questions": [ { "text": "Can two peaks and an intervening central depression be independently identified in this observation?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "landmark-evidence-q01" }, { "text": "What rule distinguishes an anatomically shallow contour from landmarks obscured by the image or cosmetics?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "landmark-evidence-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "span-depth-and-correspondence", "name": "Span, depth and correspondence", "description": "Operationalise bow geometry using declared coordinates and reference lengths.", "findings": [ { "id": "comparable-contour-measures", "name": "Comparable contour measures", "description": "Treat span, depression depth and left-right differences as protocol-dependent measurements rather than universal shape categories.", "questions": [ { "text": "What are the interpeak span and central depression depth under the stated landmark and scale conventions?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "comparable-contour-measures-q01" }, { "text": "How are the midline and head orientation established before comparing left and right peak positions?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "comparable-contour-measures-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "contour-observation-and-presentation", "name": "Contour observation and presentation", "description": "Separate the observed border from effects of pose, expression, lighting and cosmetic depiction.", "rationale": "A visible bow-shaped edge may reflect presentation conditions or drawn pigment rather than the underlying border.", "layers": [ { "id": "capture-conditions", "name": "Capture conditions", "description": "Record the conditions needed to interpret an upper-lip contour observation.", "findings": [ { "id": "observation-comparability", "name": "Observation comparability", "description": "Assess whether viewing angle, lip posture, scale and visibility support the intended recognition or comparison.", "questions": [ { "text": "Were head pose and lip posture sufficiently comparable for the proposed contour comparison?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "observation-comparability-q01" }, { "text": "Would a frontal, clearly lit observation with relaxed lips resolve the current landmark uncertainty?", "kind": "action", "id": "observation-comparability-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "anatomical-and-drawn-edges", "name": "Anatomical and drawn edges", "description": "Distinguish anatomical border evidence from lipstick, liner, retouching and illustration.", "findings": [ { "id": "outline-origin", "name": "Outline origin", "description": "Identify what produces the visible contour and whether the underlying anatomical border is separately observable.", "questions": [ { "text": "Is the visible bow defined by the anatomical border, applied pigment, digital editing or an illustration?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "outline-origin-q01" }, { "text": "Can the anatomical and cosmetic outlines be annotated separately, or must their relationship remain unresolved?", "kind": "action", "id": "outline-origin-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "variation-interpretation-and-use", "name": "Variation, interpretation and use", "description": "Support specific contour descriptions and bounded actions without imposing an aesthetic ideal or a diagnosis.", "rationale": "Cupid's bow descriptions often combine observable geometry with preference, making attribution and limits essential.", "layers": [ { "id": "shape-language-and-preference", "name": "Shape language and preference", "description": "Connect contour labels and aesthetic preferences to explicit meanings and their holders.", "findings": [ { "id": "attributed-contour-description", "name": "Attributed contour description", "description": "Record how a source or person uses terms such as pronounced, soft or asymmetric, distinguishing measured descriptions from appraisals.", "questions": [ { "text": "What observable contour properties does this speaker mean by a pronounced or soft Cupid's bow?", "kind": "definition", "id": "attributed-contour-description-q01" }, { "text": "Whose preference or descriptive convention supports the appraisal, and in what context?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "attributed-contour-description-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "comparison-and-action-limits", "name": "Comparison and action limits", "description": "Determine which annotations, comparisons and cosmetic representations the evidence supports.", "findings": [ { "id": "supported-next-step", "name": "Supported next step", "description": "Use contour evidence for description or an explicitly requested representation, while routing diagnostic and procedural questions to neighbouring models.", "questions": [ { "text": "Does the available evidence support annotation, comparison or a requested cosmetic depiction, or is another observation needed?", "kind": "action", "id": "supported-next-step-q01" }, { "text": "Does the request concern contour appearance, or does it require diagnosis or intervention planning beyond this model?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "supported-next-step-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-external-alignment", "name": "Evidence and external alignment", "description": "What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.", "rationale": "A model that cannot be lined up against existing standards, identifiers and practice cannot be adopted by anyone who already uses them.", "layers": [ { "id": "reported-evidence", "name": "Reported evidence", "description": "Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.", "findings": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes", "name": "Check these first", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "No sense was recorded; this description assumes the conventional anatomical meaning.", "The supplied domain code should be checked against the registry's intended classification.", "Contour descriptions and measurements vary across anatomical, reconstructive and cosmetic contexts; no formal subtype scheme is asserted." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of Cupid's bow 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": [ "A landmark in describing lip morphology and facial appearance.", "A reference contour in planning and assessing cleft-lip reconstruction.", "A feature emphasised or visually reshaped through lip cosmetics.", "A landmark in portraiture and facial modelling." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of Cupid's bow 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": "Distance between the two peaks", "typical_range": "No universal reference range supplied; depends on individual anatomy and measurement protocol.", "unit": "mm" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of Cupid's bow 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": [ "Treating one contour as a universal aesthetic ideal can misrepresent normal anatomical variation.", "Injury, scarring or poorly aligned surgical repair can distort the contour.", "Photographic pose, expression and perspective can affect assessments of symmetry." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of Cupid's bow 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": "Vermilion border", "difference": "The vermilion border is the boundary between the lip's red surface and surrounding skin; Cupid's bow is its central upper-lip contour." }, { "name": "Philtrum", "difference": "The philtrum is the midline groove between the nose and upper lip; Cupid's bow lies at its lower end." }, { "name": "Philtral columns", "difference": "These are the raised ridges beside the philtrum that descend toward the peaks of Cupid's bow." }, { "name": "Upper-lip tubercle", "difference": "The tubercle is the central prominence of the upper lip's vermilion, rather than the double-curved outline above it." }, { "name": "Cupid's bow in mythology", "difference": "The mythological sense denotes the god Cupid's weapon; the anatomical feature takes its name from that bow." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of Cupid's bow this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the originating registry record confirm the anatomical sense of Cupid's bow despite its XCT / XCT.QLT placement?", "Which anatomical references define the contour's endpoints, and do their definitions include adjacent philtral features?", "Which landmark and measurement protocols have demonstrated reliable Cupid's bow comparisons across observers and capture conditions?", "How should shallow or indistinct contours be described without confusing anatomical variation with insufficient visibility?", "Does an existing Vercy world model already own this concept, requiring a registry link instead of a separate publication?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 5, "layers": 9, "findings": 13, "questions": 21 } }