{ "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "research-draft", "adjudicationStatus": "unreviewed", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-12T10:31:15Z", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "breadth": "recalled by Codex without web access - no source was read", "missingProviders": [], "pass": 2, "cost": { "grok": { "seconds": 16.6, "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: 01a0952a-c60a-7c60-8b9f-6d59ed05c77c\n--------\nuser\nDescribe what is already known about one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: interactive computing\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", "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: 01a0952a-c619-7b50-a0e6-4182a29501c3\n--------\nuser\nYou are drafting a Vercy meta-model for one registered thing. Answer as JSON only, no prose around it.\n\nThing: interactive computing\nRegistry id: vr.tr.interactive-computing\nPlane / domain: PHY / PHY.OBJ\nRegistry definition: (none recorded)\nNames folded into t" } }, "enrichment": { "pass": 3, "engine": "claude", "producedAt": "2026-10-06T12:00:00Z", "ingestedAt": "2026-10-06T08:42:12+00:00", "fields": [ "agent_conduct", "ethics", "failure_modes_and_hazards", "owners", "visual_identification" ] }, "gate": { "passed": true, "version": "1.0", "at": "2026-10-07T10:10:33+00:00", "evidence": [ "completeness 1.00", "sense: Wikidata description", "2 live sources", "review by codex: pass" ] } }, "metaModel": { "id": "THING-Q956238", "registryId": "vr.tr.interactive-computing", "name": "interactive computing", "version": "0.1.0-research.1", "entryKind": "thing", "family": "Thing Registry", "domain": [ "PHY.OBJ" ], "status": "research-draft" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/thing/q956238/", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.tr.interactive-computing", "name": "interactive computing", "purpose": "Enable an agent to recognise interactive computing, assess whether its ongoing input-response loop is usable, and determine which interventions preserve user control and computational state.", "definition": "Interactive computing is a mode of computer use in which a user supplies input and receives responses during an ongoing session, allowing subsequent actions to depend on intermediate results.", "scope_statement": "This model owns interactive computing as a mode of computation in which a user supplies input, observes computational responses, and can influence subsequent processing during an ongoing interaction; it does not identify a particular device, application, or interface technology.", "in_scope": [ "The coupling between user actions, computational processing, and observable responses", "Interaction sessions, their working state, and continuity across interruptions", "Response timing, progress visibility, and handling of concurrent or repeated input", "Available user interventions, including correction, cancellation, and commitment", "The relationship between interface actions and their computational effects" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Hardware architecture and maintenance of terminals, computers, and input devices", "Application-specific domain rules and the correctness of domain results", "Batch computing that provides no opportunity to influence processing through an ongoing input-response loop", "Autonomous machine-to-machine protocols without a user interaction boundary", "Human-computer interaction as a research discipline", "General networking, operating-system, and cybersecurity models" ], "distinguishing_features": [ "A user can provide an input, observe a response, and choose a subsequent input within the same continuing activity.", "User input can influence what computation happens next; merely watching an unchangeable output stream does not establish interactive computing.", "Interactivity can be demonstrated through a command line, graphical interface, or another input-response channel; a graphical display is not required.", "An automatic feedback controller does not qualify solely because it reacts to sensor data; the model requires an identifiable user interaction boundary.", "A submission-and-result workflow qualifies only to the extent that it supports an ongoing interaction loop; a launch button alone does not make the underlying job interactive." ], "characteristics": [ { "name": "Interaction participants", "kind": "relation", "unit_or_values": "User or delegated agent ↔ interface ↔ computational process", "why_it_matters": "Identifies who can supply input and where responses and effects become observable." }, { "name": "Input modality", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Text commands, pointer actions, touch, speech, gesture, assistive input, or combinations", "why_it_matters": "Determines which actions the participant can express and how those actions are interpreted." }, { "name": "Input-to-feedback latency", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Milliseconds or seconds, with the triggering input, feedback event, workload, and percentile specified", "why_it_matters": "Shows whether users receive sufficiently timely evidence that an action was recognised." }, { "name": "Input-to-result latency", "kind": "measurement", "unit_or_values": "Milliseconds or seconds, with completion criteria and workload specified", "why_it_matters": "Separates immediate acknowledgement from completion of the requested computation." }, { "name": "Session condition", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Ready, processing, awaiting user input, suspended, disconnected, failed, or ended; concurrent conditions recorded where applicable", "why_it_matters": "Helps an agent choose whether to issue input, wait, resume, recover, or stop." }, { "name": "Working-state lifetime", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Per action, per session, persistent across sessions, or mixed", "why_it_matters": "Determines which context survives another command, interruption, or reconnection." }, { "name": "Pending-input policy", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Queue, reject, replace, merge, or execute concurrently, specified by action type", "why_it_matters": "Explains what happens when users act before previous processing finishes." }, { "name": "Intervention support", "kind": "category", "unit_or_values": "Pause, cancel, edit pending input, undo, redo, or compensate, with conditions specified", "why_it_matters": "Distinguishes stopping unfinished computation from reversing effects that already occurred." }, { "name": "Effect commitment", "kind": "state", "unit_or_values": "Preview, staged, executing, committed, partially committed, rolled back, or unknown", "why_it_matters": "Prevents an agent from treating a displayed acknowledgement as proof that an effect completed." } ], "affordances": [ "Identify available inputs and establish how their effects will be observed.", "Perform an authorised interaction step and select the next step from its response.", "Inspect progress and distinguish delayed computation from an unresponsive interaction channel.", "Correct input, cancel pending work, or undo completed work when the relevant capability exists.", "Resume an interrupted session after checking retained state and unresolved effects.", "Assess whether latency, feedback, and available controls support the intended user task." ], "agent_conduct": { "may": [ "Explain interactive computing and how it differs from batch processing.", "Run interactive sessions on systems the agent is authorized to use." ], "must_not": [ "Keep interactive sessions open on shared systems in ways that expose them to others.", "Act in a user's interactive session without the user knowing.", "Record a user's inputs and responses beyond what the user agreed to." ], "requires_human": [ "Taking over or terminating another user's interactive session." ] }, "ethics": { "considerations": [ "Interactive systems shape how people think and work; their design affects accessibility.", "Session data can reveal a user's work and private activity." ], "affected_parties": [ "Users", "System administrators" ] }, "owners": { "steward": "Nobody owns the concept; the operator of a system answers for its sessions.", "master_systems": [] }, "visual_identification": [ "A user types or clicks and sees responses immediately on a screen, as in a terminal or notebook." ], "failure_modes_and_hazards": [ "Unattended sessions can be misused by others.", "Interactive changes can be made without the review a batch process would have." ], "what_it_is_for": [ "Interactive computing is encountered in command sessions, graphical applications and other software that responds while a person is using it.", "It supports exploration, editing and decision-making by allowing users to adjust subsequent input in response to intermediate results." ], "standards_and_regulation": [ "ISO 9241-110, issued by the International Organization for Standardization, defines interaction principles relevant to interactive systems.", "ISO 9241-210, issued by the International Organization for Standardization, specifies human-centred design principles and activities for interactive systems." ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "wikidata", "title": "Wikidata item Q956238: interactive computing", "url": "https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q956238", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "identity and sense of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api" }, { "id": "wikipedia-en", "title": "Wikipedia: Interactive computing", "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_computing", "url_status": "live", "what_it_supports": "general description of the item", "checked_by": "wikidata-api sitelink" } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "interaction-loop", "name": "Interaction loop", "description": "The reciprocal relationship between user input and computational response.", "rationale": "Interactive computing is recognised through an actionable input-response loop rather than through the presence of a particular device.", "layers": [ { "id": "input-interpretation", "name": "Input interpretation", "description": "How a user action becomes a computational request.", "findings": [ { "id": "action-to-request-mapping", "name": "Action-to-request mapping", "description": "Record accepted inputs, their interpretation in the current context, and how acceptance or rejection is communicated.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which user actions supply computational input, and how does the current mode or focus change their meaning?", "kind": "definition", "id": "action-to-request-mapping-q01" }, { "text": "What observable response distinguishes accepted input from ignored or rejected input?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "action-to-request-mapping-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "response-guided-continuation", "name": "Response-guided continuation", "description": "How computational output informs the next user action.", "findings": [ { "id": "continuing-user-influence", "name": "Continuing user influence", "description": "Establish which responses let the user revise, extend, or redirect the ongoing activity.", "questions": [ { "text": "After receiving a response, what can the user change about subsequent computation?", "kind": "action", "id": "continuing-user-influence-q01" }, { "text": "Which parts of the activity support continuing interaction, and which are submitted jobs whose execution cannot be influenced?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "continuing-user-influence-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "timing-and-concurrency", "name": "Timing and concurrency", "description": "Response delays and the treatment of input while computation is underway.", "rationale": "An interaction can fail even when computation succeeds if feedback arrives too late or overlapping actions have unclear effects.", "layers": [ { "id": "feedback-and-completion", "name": "Feedback and completion", "description": "The separate timelines for acknowledging input, reporting progress, and producing results.", "findings": [ { "id": "observable-response-milestones", "name": "Observable response milestones", "description": "Record task-specific timing expectations against defined response events rather than assuming one universal interactivity threshold.", "questions": [ { "text": "What are the measured delays from input to acknowledgement, useful feedback, and completion under the intended workload?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "observable-response-milestones-q01" }, { "text": "What task requirement or user evidence establishes acceptable delay at each milestone?", "kind": "provenance", "id": "observable-response-milestones-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "overlapping-actions", "name": "Overlapping actions", "description": "How pending work interacts with newer user input.", "findings": [ { "id": "pending-input-and-result-order", "name": "Pending input and result order", "description": "Record whether new actions queue, replace, or overlap earlier work and how outdated responses are handled.", "questions": [ { "text": "What happens when another input arrives before the previous request completes?", "kind": "definition", "id": "pending-input-and-result-order-q01" }, { "text": "How can an agent determine whether a displayed response belongs to the current request or an earlier one?", "kind": "action", "id": "pending-input-and-result-order-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "session-and-working-state", "name": "Session and working state", "description": "The context that makes successive interaction steps part of one activity.", "rationale": "The meaning and outcome of an input often depend on prior interaction, retained values, and the condition of the session.", "layers": [ { "id": "context-dependence", "name": "Context dependence", "description": "Working state that changes the interpretation or result of subsequent input.", "findings": [ { "id": "inspectable-interaction-context", "name": "Inspectable interaction context", "description": "Identify consequential state such as selected objects, command environment, active modes, and partially entered requests.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which retained values, selections, modes, or prior results can change what the next input does?", "kind": "definition", "id": "inspectable-interaction-context-q01" }, { "text": "How can an agent inspect or establish that context before acting?", "kind": "action", "id": "inspectable-interaction-context-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "interruption-and-resumption", "name": "Interruption and resumption", "description": "Continuity when an interaction pauses or loses its connection.", "findings": [ { "id": "resumption-state-reconciliation", "name": "Resumption state reconciliation", "description": "Record what survives interruption and how the participant resolves uncertainty about work that may have continued.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which working state and pending computations survive suspension, disconnection, or session termination?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "resumption-state-reconciliation-q01" }, { "text": "Before retrying or resuming, how can the agent establish whether the last request completed or produced partial effects?", "kind": "action", "id": "resumption-state-reconciliation-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "user-control-and-recovery", "name": "User control and recovery", "description": "The user's ability to intervene in processing and recover from an unintended interaction.", "rationale": "Ongoing interaction needs explicit limits on what can be interrupted, corrected, or reversed.", "layers": [ { "id": "intervention-during-execution", "name": "Intervention during execution", "description": "Controls that alter work already in progress.", "findings": [ { "id": "interruption-semantics", "name": "Interruption semantics", "description": "Distinguish pausing execution, requesting cancellation, and confirming that processing has stopped.", "questions": [ { "text": "At which stages can the user pause, cancel, or redirect computation, and what continues after each intervention?", "kind": "action", "id": "interruption-semantics-q01" }, { "text": "What observable evidence confirms that an intervention took effect?", "kind": "measurement", "id": "interruption-semantics-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "correction-after-response", "name": "Correction after response", "description": "Recovery from rejected input, mistaken commands, or unwanted completed effects.", "findings": [ { "id": "correction-and-reversal-boundaries", "name": "Correction and reversal boundaries", "description": "Record how input can be repaired and which effects can be undone, repeated safely, or compensated.", "questions": [ { "text": "How can the user correct an invalid or unintended input while preserving useful working context?", "kind": "action", "id": "correction-and-reversal-boundaries-q01" }, { "text": "Which completed effects support undo or compensation, and which remain after the visible interface is reset?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "correction-and-reversal-boundaries-q02" } ] } ] } ] }, { "id": "execution-and-effect-boundaries", "name": "Execution and effect boundaries", "description": "The relationship between visible interaction, underlying computation, and consequential effects.", "rationale": "A responsive interface may control remote, delayed, or partly independent computation, so visible feedback alone cannot establish execution or commitment.", "layers": [ { "id": "interface-to-execution", "name": "Interface to execution", "description": "Where requests execute and how that execution relates to the interaction channel.", "findings": [ { "id": "execution-coupling", "name": "Execution coupling", "description": "Identify the computation behind each interaction and whether it continues independently of the interface.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which process or service executes the request, and what links its status to the response shown to the user?", "kind": "relation", "id": "execution-coupling-q01" }, { "text": "Does closing or losing the interface stop computation, detach from it, or leave its condition uncertain?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "execution-coupling-q02" } ] } ] }, { "id": "commitment-and-authority", "name": "Commitment and authority", "description": "When an interaction creates effects and who may initiate them.", "findings": [ { "id": "preview-to-committed-effect", "name": "Preview-to-committed effect", "description": "Distinguish exploration and staged changes from actions that commit effects under the participant's authority.", "questions": [ { "text": "Which interaction step commits an effect, and what evidence distinguishes a preview, an accepted request, and a completed change?", "kind": "boundary", "id": "preview-to-committed-effect-q01" }, { "text": "What authority or user instruction permits the agent to perform that committing action?", "kind": "action", "id": "preview-to-committed-effect-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": [ "The PHY.OBJ domain assignment appears mismatched: interactive computing ordinarily denotes a mode of use, not a physical device.", "No recorded sense establishes whether the registry intends the general mode of use or the academic field sometimes called interactive computing.", "The listed ISO standards apply to the design of interactive systems; they do not establish a universal certification requirement for interactive computing." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-confidence-notes-q01", "text": "Which of these check these first hold for the sense of interactive computing 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": [ "Command-line interaction", "Graphical direct-manipulation interaction", "Conversational interaction", "Interactive programming and computational notebooks" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-kinds-q01", "text": "Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of interactive computing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] }, { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation", "name": "Standards and regulation", "description": "Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.", "evidence": [ "ISO 9241-110, issued by ISO, specifies interaction principles applicable to interactive systems.", "ISO 9241-210, issued by ISO, addresses human-centred design for interactive systems." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-standards-and-regulation-q01", "text": "Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of interactive computing 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": [ "Editing documents and manipulating graphical designs", "Exploring data and adjusting analyses in computational notebooks", "Operating software through commands and inspecting their results", "Controlling simulations and observing changes", "Using interactive educational software" ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-real-world-use-q01", "text": "Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of interactive computing 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": "Response latency between user input and observable system feedback", "typical_range": "Task-dependent; no universal range", "unit": "ms" } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-measurements-q01", "text": "Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of interactive computing 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": [ "Delayed or missing feedback can prompt repeated inputs and unintended duplicate actions.", "Interface freezes can interrupt work and cause loss of unsaved changes.", "Unclear system state can lead users to act on mistaken assumptions.", "Inaccessible interaction methods can prevent users from completing tasks.", "Concurrent updates can make displayed information stale and cause conflicting actions." ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-failure-modes-and-hazards-q01", "text": "Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of interactive computing 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": "Batch processing", "difference": "Batch processing executes submitted work without requiring an ongoing exchange with the user; interactive computing supports exchanges during the session." }, { "name": "Human-computer interaction", "difference": "Human-computer interaction is the field studying and designing interactions; interactive computing is a mode of computer use." }, { "name": "Real-time computing", "difference": "Real-time computing requires responses within specified timing constraints; interactive computing does not inherently guarantee deadlines." }, { "name": "Time-sharing", "difference": "Time-sharing allocates computing resources among multiple users or processes; interactive computing can occur on either shared or dedicated systems." } ], "questions": [ { "id": "evidence-neighbours-q01", "text": "Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of interactive computing this model covers, and on what evidence?", "kind": "provenance" } ] } ] } ] } ] }, "openQuestions": [ "Does the registry intend interactive computing to denote a mode of computation, a class of systems, or a physical installation, and how should that interpretation relate to its current PHY / PHY.OBJ placement?", "Which existing Vercy world model, if any, already owns interactive computing and should serve as its single source of truth?", "Should agent-mediated interaction qualify when no human participates in the immediate loop, and what boundary separates it from autonomous machine-to-machine processing?", "What task-specific evidence should establish acceptable feedback and completion delays across command-line, graphical, conversational, and other interactive forms?", "Which primary sources and applicable standards should substantiate the terminology, intervention semantics, and session-continuity expectations proposed in this draft?" ], "statistics": { "bundles": 6, "layers": 11, "findings": 17, "questions": 27 } }