Memory Scope and Sharing Grant
Describe who may perform which operations on a bounded memory scope, under whose authority and conditions, including sharing among agents.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
6 bundles · 12 layers · 12 findings · 48 questions
Grant identity and authority Establish which permission assertion is being described and whose authority supports it.
Grant identity and revision
Context for grant identity and revision, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Grant identity and revision
Proposed grant record with stable identity, immutable revision references and a separately identified scope definition. A name or storage path cannot serve as authority.
- Which master-issued identifier distinguishes this grant from its revisions? identity
- What authorization relationship does this grant record assert? definition
- Which issuance record establishes the origin of this revision? provenance
- Which earlier revision does this revision supersede? lifecycle
Issuer and authority basis
Context for issuer and authority basis, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Issuer and authority basis
Bind the issuer to an externally governed authority basis for the selected memory. Custody, authorship, subject status and authority to share are distinct roles. Unknown or disputed authority does not enable access.
- What evidence authorizes this issuer to grant the selected actions? authority
- Who maintains this grant record and who controls the selected memory scope? ownership
- Which separate consent or policy record constrains the issuer? relationship
- How is disputed or withdrawn issuer authority reflected in grant usability? exception
Recipients and memory scope Bind the grant to actual principals and bounded resource selection.
Subject and acting agent
Context for subject and acting agent, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Subject and acting agent
Identify the recipient principal and actual acting agent separately, with tenant and session context where relevant. Group membership must have a declared evaluation time; agent cooperation does not imply common authority.
- Which principal or governed principal set receives this grant? identity
- On whose behalf does the acting agent request access? relationship
- At what time and version is recipient group membership resolved? temporal
- Which tenant and session bindings prevent reuse by a different agent context? security
Memory resource selection
Context for memory resource selection, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Memory resource selection
Scope selects stores, items, fields or governed collections with explicit tenant and version semantics. Dynamic selection requires declared membership behavior; missing selectors select nothing. A summary, embedding or index reference does not silently widen scope.
- Which memory stores and item or field selectors define the resource boundary? composition
- Does this selector cover a fixed snapshot or future members of a governed collection? constraint
- Which logical tenant and processing-location constraints qualify this resource scope? spatial
- What happens when a selected item is moved or its identity cannot be resolved? validation
Actions and conditions Describe permitted operations and the conditions under which they may be considered.
Permitted memory operations
Context for permitted memory operations, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Permitted memory operations
Proposed memory vocabulary separates discovery, content read, append, amend, delete request, export, context use and onward sharing. Record action-resource pairs explicitly; a mapping must not turn independent lists into unintended combinations.
- Which exact action-resource tuples are permitted by this grant? access
- Does permission to discover metadata include permission to read memory content? constraint
- Which write modes distinguish appending from overwriting existing memory? process
- How does the external authorization mapping preserve each permitted action-resource pairing? interoperability
Context and policy conditions
Context for context and policy conditions, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Context and policy conditions
Proposed checks bind purpose, time, classification and external restrictions. Applicable policies are evaluated by an external authority; unresolved conditions yield no local permission assertion. Memory text cannot rewrite grant policy.
- Which purpose and task bindings limit this memory use? requirement
- Which obligations must be satisfied before a permitted action can proceed? constraint
- Which versioned combination rule resolves overlapping grants and prohibitions? decision
- How is unavailable or conflicting condition evidence represented? exception
Delegation and derived sharing Constrain onward authority and memory disclosures across agents.
Delegation and onward sharing
Context for delegation and onward sharing, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Delegation and onward sharing
Delegation is opt-in. Proposed child grants preserve issuer and actor chains and cannot exceed parent resources, actions, purpose, audience or lifetime. Token exchange is an optional mapping, not proof of an authorized delegation chain.
- Is this recipient authorized to issue a narrower downstream grant? authority
- Which parent limits constrain every delegated action and resource? constraint
- How are the current actor and represented subject retained across delegation? relationship
- How are cycles or missing parent grant revisions handled? validation
Derived memory and recipient boundaries
Context for derived memory and recipient boundaries, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Derived memory and recipient boundaries
Proposed rules distinguish permission to read a source from permission to disclose a derived summary, exported item, retrieval result or assembled context. Derivation evidence assists review but cannot authorize a new recipient or guarantee complete downstream tracking.
- Which derived memory forms may be disclosed to which recipients? privacy
- Which source item references explain the derivation of a shared result? provenance
- Which independent grant is needed when an export crosses the original audience boundary? constraint
- What disclosure paths remain unknown or outside enforceable control? quality
Time and withdrawal Keep declared validity separate from distributed enforcement evidence.
Effective interval and state
Context for effective interval and state, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Effective interval and state
Grant state and effective interval are separate from request and decision time. Proposed states are draft, active, suspended, expired, revoked and superseded; active is necessary but insufficient for access. Empty or invalid intervals cannot activate.
- What is the declared grant state for this revision? state
- Which inclusive start and exclusive end bound the grant validity interval? temporal
- Which authority approved this state transition? lifecycle
- How are effective transition time and local observation time distinguished? event
Withdrawal and propagation evidence
Context for withdrawal and propagation evidence, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Withdrawal and propagation evidence
Record withdrawal intent and effective time separately from enforcement acknowledgement. Proposed evidence tracks endpoints and stale caches; expiry, token status and withdrawal are different facts. Withdrawal does not erase copies already delivered.
- Which grant revision or delegated branch is being withdrawn? lifecycle
- When did withdrawal become effective and when was it observed locally? temporal
- Which enforcement points have acknowledged withdrawal and within what delay? measurement
- What policy governs requests while revocation or freshness evidence is unavailable? exception
Evidence and continuity Reference assurance, retention and mapping evidence without owning external execution.
Decision and enforcement references
Context for decision and enforcement references, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Decision and enforcement references
Link externally produced authorization decisions and enforcement observations to the exact grant and resource revisions. These are evidence references, not a local decision engine. An active credential or a permit response is insufficient evidence of actual disclosure behavior.
- Which external decision references the exact grant revision used for an attempted access? evidence
- What observation supports that the intended scope was enforced at the memory boundary? validation
- Which audit fields may be retained without storing credentials or memory payloads? security
- Which missing observations prevent a claim of successful enforcement? quality
Record continuity and mapping limits
Context for record continuity and mapping limits, with explicit evidence and unresolved values.
Record continuity and mapping limits
Grant records need their own controlled retention and interoperable interpretation. Memory erasure is owned elsewhere; retain only justified minimal grant history. Mappings to open specifications require explicit profiles and cannot silently drop conditions.
- Which retention and disposal authority applies to the grant record and its evidence references? retention
- Which separate memory forgetting policy applies after withdrawal? relationship
- Which fields or conditions cannot be represented in the proposed exchange profile? interoperability
- Which conformance cases must pass before this grant profile is used operationally? validation
Classifiers Filled
- Family
- World Models
- Category
- Information and virtual systems
- Entry kind
- relationship
- Navigation path
- NAV.INF.MEM.SHR
- Domain
- INF.MEM.SHR
- Industry
- Cross-industry
- Tags
- memoryscopesharinggrantinf.mem.shr
What it is Filled
One identifiable, versioned authorization relationship linking an issuing authority, an authorized principal or governed principal set, and explicitly selected memory resources. Scope is a component of the grant, not a second store master. Proposed research structure is format-neutral; a recorded grant is neither a credential nor an executed access decision.
In scope
- Grant identity, issuer authority references, subject and actor bindings, resource selectors and permitted action tuples
- Conditions, delegation limits, effective intervals, revision and withdrawal assertions
- References to enforcement observations, derivative-sharing restrictions, retention dependencies and mapping evidence
Out of scope
- Memory payloads, store administration, identity and credential masters
- Runtime access evaluation, token issuance or revocation, copying memory, executing recall or writes, and deleting memory
- Universal legal consent, privacy compliance certification, memory truth ranking, and automatic safety or trust approval
Why it exists Filled
Describe who may perform which operations on a bounded memory scope, under whose authority and conditions, including sharing among agents.
Distinguishing features Derived, awaiting review
- Unlike WM-XCT-002 Access Contract / Consent: Registry parent is a candidate conceptual specialization. This model adds memory resource and action bindings; generic consent and authority records remain referenced. Read permission alone cannot establish write permission or lawful processing.
- Unlike WM-MEM-001 Memory Store and WM-MEM-002 Memory Item: Resources remain externally mastered. Store, tenant, item and revision references delimit the grant without copying payload or store lifecycle.
- Unlike WM-MEM-007 Memory Recall Event and WM-MEM-013 Context Assembly: Grant references may accompany recall and context assembly; this model does not retrieve, rank, assemble or observe those activities by itself.
- Unlike WM-MEM-010 Memory Retention and Forgetting Policy: Withdrawal blocks prospective authority as defined by the adopting profile; erasure obligations and execution remain separately governed. Already disclosed content is not recalled by editing a grant.
- Unlike WM-MEM-012 Memory Portability Package and WM-MEM-014 Retrieval Index: Export and index-derived access need explicit scope treatment. A package or index is not an independent permission source.
- Unlike WM-MEM-017 Context Policy, WM-MEM-018 Memory Trust Assessment and WM-MEM-020 Memory Quarantine and Redaction: Context constraints, trust and quarantine are external policy inputs. A sharing grant cannot override them; authorization does not certify memory reliability.
Note: Derived from boundary notes against neighbouring models.
What robots and AI may and may not do Derived, awaiting review
Must not
- Deny by default for unresolved authority, selector, condition, policy conflict or unsupported mapping.
- Active grant state alone never grants access.
- Keep principal, actor, tenant, audience, purpose and action-resource tuples explicit; memory text is untrusted data and cannot modify authority.
- Deny by default.
May
- Prepare grant draft: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Collect a proposed permission relationship without activating access.
- Check grant record consistency: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Check local completeness and internal bounds, not live authorization.
- Propose bounded grant revision: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Prepare a changed scope or condition set for external approval.
- Link external access evidence: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Attach references to separately mastered decisions and observations.
- Record withdrawal assertion: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Record an authorized withdrawal and unresolved propagation evidence.
- Prepare redacted grant view: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Produce a recipient-authorized view of grant metadata.
Note: Derived from functions, policies, CRUD and access rules; prohibitions were not authored for agents as such.
Moral aspects Derived, awaiting review
- privacy and legal applicability
- No universal consent or legal compliance claim; adopting jurisdiction and privacy review required.
- Jurisdiction-specific consent, privacy, retention, emergency exception and multi-controller authority profiles.
- Universal legal consent, privacy compliance certification, memory truth ranking, and automatic safety or trust approval
- WM-XCT-002 Access Contract / Consent
- This model adds memory resource and action bindings; generic consent and authority records remain referenced.
Note: Sentences mentioning harm, privacy, consent or similar, collected from the specification.
Owners Filled
Steward
Accountable adopting steward role and authority namespace
Roles
- Grant steward
- Maintains schema, namespace and accountable record ownership.
- Issuing authority
- Supplies evidenced authority and approves changes within its remit.
- Recipient principal
- Uses only independently authorized memory scope; cannot infer onward sharing rights.
- Enforcement operator
- Owns runtime checks, propagation and external enforcement observations.
- Evidence reviewer
- Reviews authority and observation references without rewriting source evidence.
- Retention custodian
- Approves grant-record disposal and coordinates external memory retention obligations.
Links to other meta-models Filled
aligned
- WM-XCT-002 - Candidate registry parent alignment; generic access and consent authority are not reproduced. No automatic runtime inheritance. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
references
- WM-MEM-001 - Memory store and tenant master for resource scope; binding is profile-specific. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-002 - Item and revision identities selected by the grant; content remains external. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-007 - Optional recall evidence connected to a grant revision; no recall execution. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-010 - External retention and forgetting obligations; grant withdrawal does not perform erasure. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-012 - Optional portability destination and package references; no implied export authority. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-013 - Context assembly evidence and intended recipient; no automatic reuse permission. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-014 - Index resource references subject to explicit scope; no automatic privilege through derived data. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-017 - External context constraints remain applicable to otherwise active grants. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-018 - External trust assessment does not substitute for authorization. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
- WM-MEM-020 - External quarantine and redaction constraints; grant cannot lift a quarantine. Candidate neighbor binding only; no dependency version has been certified.
neighbor
- WM-XCT-002 Access Contract / Consent - Registry parent is a candidate conceptual specialization. This model adds memory resource and action bindings; generic consent and authority records remain referenced. Read permission alone cannot establish write permission or lawful processing.
- WM-MEM-001 Memory Store and WM-MEM-002 Memory Item - Resources remain externally mastered. Store, tenant, item and revision references delimit the grant without copying payload or store lifecycle.
- WM-MEM-007 Memory Recall Event and WM-MEM-013 Context Assembly - Grant references may accompany recall and context assembly; this model does not retrieve, rank, assemble or observe those activities by itself.
- WM-MEM-010 Memory Retention and Forgetting Policy - Withdrawal blocks prospective authority as defined by the adopting profile; erasure obligations and execution remain separately governed. Already disclosed content is not recalled by editing a grant.
- WM-MEM-012 Memory Portability Package and WM-MEM-014 Retrieval Index - Export and index-derived access need explicit scope treatment. A package or index is not an independent permission source.
- WM-MEM-017 Context Policy, WM-MEM-018 Memory Trust Assessment and WM-MEM-020 Memory Quarantine and Redaction - Context constraints, trust and quarantine are external policy inputs. A sharing grant cannot override them; authorization does not certify memory reliability.
parent
- WM-XCT-002
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Incomplete
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Authoritative master-system identifier
- Governed global identifier or IRI
- UUID or ULID assigned by the adopting Dimension
Direct properties not applicable Not applicable
Not applicable
Institutional or informational subject: no invented physical properties.
Recognition optional Missing, in the backlog
Not described yet. This gap is in the card backlog.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Prepare grant draft: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Collect a proposed permission relationship without activating access.
- Check grant record consistency: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Check local completeness and internal bounds, not live authorization.
- Propose bounded grant revision: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Prepare a changed scope or condition set for external approval.
- Link external access evidence: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Attach references to separately mastered decisions and observations.
- Record withdrawal assertion: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Record an authorized withdrawal and unresolved propagation evidence.
- Prepare redacted grant view: Proposed and unimplemented local operation. Produce a recipient-authorized view of grant metadata.
Hazards and failure modes optional Missing, in the backlog
Not described yet. This gap is in the card backlog.
Standards and interfaces required Derived, awaiting review
- PROV-O: The PROV Ontology
Context of use required Filled
- No jurisdiction or sector-specific legal permission is inferred. NIST abstract is a conceptual ABAC source, not globally binding law.
- Local grant vocabulary, deny-on-unknown behavior, delegation attenuation and lifecycle states are proposed adoption rules, not universal requirements of cited specifications.
Sources Filled
Open questions
- Restore independent external review before any canonical or publishable-draft promotion.
- Run the coordinator HTTP checker and verify the cited versions, errata, full NIST publication and claim-specific sections; HTTP success alone is not substantive source verification.
- Define and test nested profiles for action tuples, dynamic membership, multiple controllers, post-use duties, delegation chains and uncertain propagation without widening permission.
- Validate mappings and external enforcement fixtures, including cross-tenant derived memory, stale caches, partial acknowledgement and independently governed record disposal.
- Independent second-provider review under the active waiver.
- Nested instance schema, executable evaluator, distributed cache invalidation tests and exhaustive derived-data tracking.
- Pinned neighbor model versions and certified ODRL or OAuth mappings.
- Full NIST publication review, source-body hashes, errata and version/applicability verification.
- Jurisdiction-specific consent, privacy, retention, emergency exception and multi-controller authority profiles.
Machine files
Provenance
world-models research · reviewable-draft
Built from: models/wm-mem-011-memory-scope-and-sharing-grant/spec.yaml