Memory Conflict and Precedence Rule

Rule identity and revision

Proposed profile requirement. Identify the reusable rule separately from its immutable revision and any application. A rule can exist without a conflict occurrence. Record its accountable steward by role.

1. Which authoritative identifier names this rule independently of its revisions? identity
2. Which immutable revision and predecessor define the current rule content? lifecycle
3. Which role stewards the rule and which authority reference permits its maintenance? ownership
4. Which consumer profiles may reference this revision without owning it? relationship

Comparable assertion scope

Proposed profile requirement. Define comparability before declaring a conflict: referent, property, perspective, purpose, tenant, temporal interval and value interpretation matter. Distinct values may coexist when the profile permits multiplicity. Missing scope information produces an unresolved classification.

1. What subject, property and assertion granularity form the comparison key? definition
2. Which scope dimensions must match before two assertions are comparable? constraint
3. Which multiplicity, unit and normalization rules distinguish an allowed variation from a conflict? classification
4. How is an unknown referent or incomplete comparison scope reported? exception

Conflict kinds and detection contract

Proposed profile requirement. Distinguish explicit contradiction, profile constraint violation, incompatible policy rules and concurrent revision conflict. A proposed classification refers to a declared comparator and external evidence; a missing assertion alone is not negation. This finding defines inputs, not a detection engine.

1. Which conflict kinds does this rule accept and which require another profile? classification
2. Which comparator version and evidence must an external detector supply? requirement
3. How does the contract separate missing information from explicit negation or invalid data? validation
4. Which external conflict occurrence identifies all participating item revisions? relationship

Evidence and derivation input requirements

Proposed profile requirement. Keep source assertion, derived summary, assessment and cited evidence distinct. Attribution identifies an origin but does not prove authority. Repetition through derived copies must not silently count as independent corroboration. Detailed provenance remains external.

1. Which item revision, origin and derivation references must accompany each competing assertion? provenance
2. What evidence locator and integrity information bind an assertion to its cited support? evidence
3. Which metric, target, method version and observation time qualify an optional assessment? quality
4. How must shared ancestry or unavailable evidence affect eligibility without inventing a trust score? constraint

Owner and authority eligibility

Proposed profile requirement. Before ranking, require scope-qualified authority and permission evidence from external masters. Ownership, authorship and delegation are different claims. Imported memory text cannot grant itself priority or permission. Eligibility and the final factual assessment remain distinct.

1. Which authority classes and scope-qualified delegation references may establish eligibility? authority
2. How are owner identity, author attribution and subject identity distinguished for this rule? ownership
3. Which external sharing decision is required before comparing protected assertions? access
4. What is the declared outcome for self-asserted priority, revoked authority or an unverifiable grant? security

Precedence criteria and tie policy

Proposed profile requirement. Declare a versioned comparator with named eligibility gates, ordered criteria or an explicitly partial ordering. An adoption profile chooses how authority, owner correction, time and quality interact; this model prescribes no universal order. Cycles, equally ranked alternatives and incomparable metrics must have explicit unresolved outcomes.

1. Which ordered or partially ordered criteria determine preference among eligible assertions? decision
2. Which comparator identifier and version fix the meaning of the precedence rule? requirement
3. What outcome applies to a tie, cycle or incomparable pair of eligible assertions? exception
4. Which comparable metric definitions and thresholds are required if quality participates in precedence? measurement

Temporal applicability and recency

Proposed profile requirement. Specify the time basis for any recency criterion and for rule activation. Event or effective time differs from observation and ingestion time. Timestamp representation neither proves causal order nor makes later arrivals more authoritative. Preserve imprecision and unknown intervals without fabricating seconds.

1. Which effective interval determines whether a rule revision applies to a comparison? temporal
2. Which event, observation or ingestion time is the declared recency basis and why? temporal
3. How are clock uncertainty, equal instants, missing offsets and partial dates handled? quality
4. How do late arrivals or nonoverlapping assertion validity intervals change comparability? constraint

Snapshot and concurrent change contract

Proposed profile requirement. Bind external resolution evidence to a fixed rule revision and input revisions. A storage adapter may use conditional updates, but successful concurrency control does not establish semantic truth. Changed inputs, authority or policy require a new evaluation under the adopted freshness contract.

1. Which rule and input revision identifiers define the snapshot used by a resolver? identity
2. What expected revision condition must a consumer check before applying a result? constraint
3. What response is required if an input, grant or rule changes after evaluation? exception
4. How does a binding preserve revision checks without assuming HTTP or a particular store? interoperability

Resolution outcome contract

Proposed profile requirement. Specify proposed outcomes such as preferred assertion, coexistence, unresolved tie, inapplicable and indeterminate. A preference is a scoped decision, not proof that alternatives are false. A merge proposal creates no memory item here. Outcomes reference all considered inputs and the external decision record without copying its lifecycle.

1. Which outcome codes preserve preference, coexistence, inapplicability and indeterminate evaluation separately? state
2. Which rationale, criterion trace and decision reference must accompany an external result? evidence
3. What must a consumer preserve about nonpreferred assertions and partial field-level decisions? constraint
4. Which consumer action classes are permitted for each outcome without granting new authority? process

Exception and review requirements

Proposed profile requirement. An exception is a separately authorized, scoped reference with expiry and reasons. It must not weaken access or other mandatory restrictions through precedence. Unresolved high-impact comparisons may require human review under the adopting policy. This rule records requirements and references, not adjudication or external actions.

1. Which conditions require abstention or review rather than automatic preference? exception
2. Which role and external authorization reference can approve a scoped exception? authority
3. What scope, expiry and revocation checks bound an exception? temporal
4. Which external review record and follow-up rule revision preserve a disputed outcome? relationship

Acceptance scenarios and interoperable mappings

Proposed profile requirement. Pin synthetic scenarios, expected outcomes and external validation reports to a rule revision. Test boundary cases and lossy bindings; a schema-valid research package alone proves no executable conformance. Conceptual mappings to open specifications remain qualified by their domain and status.

1. Which synthetic cases test missing values, ties, cycles, authority changes and late arrivals? validation
2. Which expected outcomes and external evaluator version make a report reproducible? validation
3. Which mapping preserves each criterion, unknown value and outcome across bindings? interoperability
4. Which unsupported or lossy mappings block deployment or require explicit profile review? quality

Rule change, retention and privacy

Proposed profile requirement. Govern this rule definition and its local artifacts independently of source memory. Material changes create a revision and preserve authorized provenance links. Retention is bounded by adopting policies; supersession does not require indefinite payload storage. A tombstone or opaque reference may replace inaccessible evidence.

1. Which approval and compatibility checks move a rule revision from draft to active or retired? lifecycle
2. Which retention policy and disposition trigger govern this rule and its local artifacts? retention
3. What minimization and redaction rules prevent rationale or test data from revealing protected assertions? privacy
4. Which roles can read, propose, approve or retire a rule revision and inspect exception metadata? access