# Vercy AI instruction - YAML 1.2 (JSON-compatible) { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "published", "adjudicationStatus": "reviewable-draft", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-10-21T17:33:09Z", "synthesisSha256": "d3ac4cc23759c0edc3af39afae177807006fe86c600332b90bdcdab09c11b5b4", "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "Claude", "Grok" ] }, "metaModel": { "id": "WM-MEM-018", "registryId": "vr.wm-mem-018", "name": "Memory Trust Assessment", "version": "0.1.0", "previousVersions": [], "entryKind": "entity", "family": "World Models", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "industry": [ "Cross-industry" ], "domain": [ "INF.MEM.TRS" ], "tags": [ "memory", "trust", "assessment", "inf.mem.trs" ], "status": "published" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/wm-mem-018-memory-trust-assessment/", "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-mem-018", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.wm-mem-018", "model_id": "WM-MEM-018", "name": "Memory Trust Assessment", "entry_kind": "entity", "purpose": "Record a justified, context-specific trust assessment of a memory record and its source, preserving evidence, uncertainty and review limits.", "scope_statement": "One persistently identified assessment record, with versioned target-specific judgments and references to external evidence, policies and consumers. The assessment activity and underlying memory have separate identities.", "in_scope": [ "Assessment subject binding and intended reliance context", "Evidence references, source observations and dimension results", "Scoped recommendations, uncertainty, reassessment and record governance" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Memory storage, formation, consolidation, recall and context assembly", "Definition or enforcement of conflict rules, access grants, quarantine, redaction or incident response", "Universal truth scoring, automatic permission grants or reputation judgments about a person beyond the declared source role", "Operational security detection, credential issuance and device attestation implementations" ], "boundary_notes": [ { "neighbor": "WM-XCT-026 Quality / Confidence", "distinction": "Registry parent is a candidate alignment to generic quality, score and method concepts; this model specializes target-specific memory assessment records without asserting inherited runtime behavior.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-002 Memory Item", "distinction": "The memory item owns its content, validity and lifecycle. This record refers to an exact item revision and never changes it by rating it.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-006 Memory Formation Event", "distinction": "Formation and extraction are evidence references; formation confidence is not automatically this use-specific trust judgment.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-009 Memory Conflict and Precedence Rule", "distinction": "Conflict resolution authority and rule lifecycle remain external. Here record contrary evidence and reference a rule or resolution.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-010 Memory Retention and Forgetting Policy", "distinction": "The assessment binds an applicable retention policy; memory erasure is not performed by its assessment operations.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-011 Memory Scope and Sharing Grant", "distinction": "Access permission is separately checked; a positive trust recommendation cannot grant read or write access.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-017 Context Policy", "distinction": "Context instructions and precedence rules remain independently mastered and cannot be supplied or modified by remembered content.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-019 Memory Poisoning Incident and WM-MEM-020 Memory Quarantine and Redaction", "distinction": "Suspicion and referral can be recorded here. Investigation, quarantine, release and redaction are externally owned actions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] } ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "SRC-001", "title": "PROV-O: The PROV Ontology", "organization": "W3C", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/", "version_or_date": "Recommendation, 2013-04-30", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Attribution, derivation and revision vocabulary. Lineage records are not judgments of truth." }, { "id": "SRC-002", "title": "Data on the Web Best Practices: Data Quality Vocabulary", "organization": "W3C", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/vocab-dqv/", "version_or_date": "Working Group Note, 2016-12-15", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Contextual quality annotations, measurements, metrics and their provenance. Memory adaptation is proposed here, not prescribed by DQV." }, { "id": "SRC-003", "title": "RFC 9334: Remote ATtestation procedureS (RATS) Architecture", "organization": "IETF", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9334", "version_or_date": "Informational RFC, January 2023", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Evidence appraisal, relying-party decisions and freshness. Only an architectural analogy for memory assessments; no device-attestation conformance claim." }, { "id": "SRC-004", "title": "AI Risk Management Framework 1.0: Core", "organization": "NIST", "url": "https://airc.nist.gov/airmf-resources/airmf/5-sec-core/", "version_or_date": "AI RMF 1.0, 2023; living web rendering accessed in this run", "source_type": "public-authority", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Documented measurement, deployment context, limitations, feedback and risk monitoring. This voluntary framework does not define a memory trust score." }, { "id": "SRC-005", "title": "Verifiable Credentials Data Model v2.0", "organization": "W3C", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/vc-data-model-2.0/", "version_or_date": "Recommendation, 2025-05-15", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Verification of authenticity and status is distinct from truth and authorization. Credential evidence is optional, not required for all memories." }, { "id": "SRC-006", "title": "LLM Prompt Injection Prevention Cheat Sheet", "organization": "OWASP", "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/LLM_Prompt_Injection_Prevention_Cheat_Sheet.html", "version_or_date": "Living guidance; no immutable revision pinned at access", "source_type": "first-party-doc", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T17:32:09Z", "relevance": "Policy-level treatment of persistent memory and retrieval poisoning, untrusted data and oversight. No attack payloads or detector implementation is adopted." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "mta-b-subject", "name": "Assessment subject", "description": "Bind each judgment to its exact subject and intended use.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-binding", "name": "Subject binding", "description": "A stable assessment record identifies either a memory revision or a source in a memory-use context. A combined assessment contains separately labeled judgments for each target; a source rating cannot silently become a content rating.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-binding", "name": "Assessment identity and target", "description": "A stable assessment record identifies either a memory revision or a source in a memory-use context. A combined assessment contains separately labeled judgments for each target; a source rating cannot silently become a content rating.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-binding-q1", "text": "Which master assessment identifier and exact memory revision or source identifier does this judgment concern?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "assessment_id", "target_kind", "target_reference", "target_revision" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-binding-q2", "text": "Does the target represent memory content, its source, or separately identified judgments about both?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "target_kind", "judgment_target_map" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-binding-q3", "text": "Which source-to-memory link is evidenced and which association remains unknown?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "source_reference", "memory_reference", "link_evidence", "link_status" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-binding-d1", "name": "assessment_id", "description": "Candidate field for assessment identity and target. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "identifier", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-binding-d2", "name": "target_binding", "description": "Candidate field for assessment identity and target. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-binding-artifact", "name": "Subject binding record", "description": "Versioned evidence view for assessment identity and target, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-context", "name": "Use context", "description": "Assess fitness for a declared task, domain, tenant and relying role. Acceptance in one context neither grants permission nor establishes suitability in another; absent context prevents a positive use recommendation.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-context", "name": "Purpose and reliance envelope", "description": "Assess fitness for a declared task, domain, tenant and relying role. Acceptance in one context neither grants permission nor establishes suitability in another; absent context prevents a positive use recommendation.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-context-q1", "text": "For which use and claim scope is the assessment intended?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "purpose", "claim_scope", "domain" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-context-q2", "text": "Which accountable role owns the assessment policy and which role will rely on it?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "policy_owner_role", "relying_role", "tenant_scope" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-context-q3", "text": "Which changes of purpose or scope require a fresh assessment before reuse?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "reuse_conditions", "scope_change_triggers" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-context-d1", "name": "use_context", "description": "Candidate field for purpose and reliance envelope. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-context-d2", "name": "reuse_constraints", "description": "Candidate field for purpose and reliance envelope. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-context-artifact", "name": "Reliance context statement", "description": "Versioned evidence view for purpose and reliance envelope, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "mta-b-evidence", "name": "Evidence and origin", "description": "Keep source attribution and content support separately inspectable.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-lineage", "name": "Lineage", "description": "Record formation, transformation and citation links to versioned evidence. Repetition, summary and circular citation are not independent corroboration; missing or inaccessible evidence remains an explicit gap.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-lineage", "name": "Traceable evidence chain", "description": "Record formation, transformation and citation links to versioned evidence. Repetition, summary and circular citation are not independent corroboration; missing or inaccessible evidence remains an explicit gap.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-lineage-q1", "text": "Which evidence revisions and transformation records support the assessed memory?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "evidence_references", "formation_reference", "derivation_links" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-lineage-q2", "text": "Which apparently separate reports share the same origin or cite one another?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "origin_groups", "dependency_links", "independence_rationale" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-lineage-q3", "text": "Which lineage segments are missing, inaccessible or disputed?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "lineage_gaps", "access_status", "dispute_reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-lineage-d1", "name": "lineage_map", "description": "Candidate field for traceable evidence chain. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-lineage-d2", "name": "evidence_gaps", "description": "Candidate field for traceable evidence chain. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-lineage-artifact", "name": "Evidence lineage index", "description": "Versioned evidence view for traceable evidence chain, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-authenticity", "name": "Authenticity", "description": "Keep observed issuer identity, integrity checks and credential status separate from factual credibility. An unavailable check is unknown, a failed check is adverse evidence, and neither a signature nor a digest alone proves the memory true.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-003" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-authenticity", "name": "Source identity and integrity observations", "description": "Keep observed issuer identity, integrity checks and credential status separate from factual credibility. An unavailable check is unknown, a failed check is adverse evidence, and neither a signature nor a digest alone proves the memory true.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-q1", "text": "What identity, integrity or credential checks were actually performed and with which result?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "check_type", "verifier_reference", "result", "checked_at" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-q2", "text": "Which policy authorizes reliance on the asserted source for this domain?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "authority_basis", "domain_scope", "policy_revision" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-q3", "text": "Which content claims remain unsupported despite successful authenticity checks?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "unsupported_claims", "verification_limits" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-d1", "name": "authenticity_observations", "description": "Candidate field for source identity and integrity observations. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-d2", "name": "source_authority_basis", "description": "Candidate field for source identity and integrity observations. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-authenticity-artifact", "name": "Authenticity observation report", "description": "Versioned evidence view for source identity and integrity observations, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "mta-b-appraisal", "name": "Appraisal method", "description": "Make assessment dimensions, measurement and uncertainty reviewable.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-criteria", "name": "Criteria", "description": "Select explicit dimensions, evidence rules and decision thresholds for the intended use. Content credibility, source reliability, relevance and freshness remain distinct; a composite label needs a declared aggregation rule and cannot override a hard exclusion.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-003" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-criteria", "name": "Versioned assessment profile", "description": "Select explicit dimensions, evidence rules and decision thresholds for the intended use. Content credibility, source reliability, relevance and freshness remain distinct; a composite label needs a declared aggregation rule and cannot override a hard exclusion.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-criteria-q1", "text": "Which profile revision defines the dimensions and minimum evidence for this assessment?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "profile_reference", "profile_revision", "dimensions", "minimum_evidence" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-criteria-q2", "text": "How are values, scales, aggregation and mandatory exclusions defined?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "scale_definitions", "aggregation_rule", "exclusions", "thresholds" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-criteria-q3", "text": "Which incoming metric meanings can be mapped without losing scope or uncertainty?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "metric_mappings", "mapping_version", "losses", "unmapped_dimensions" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-criteria-d1", "name": "profile_binding", "description": "Candidate field for versioned assessment profile. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-criteria-d2", "name": "dimension_definitions", "description": "Candidate field for versioned assessment profile. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-criteria-artifact", "name": "Assessment profile binding", "description": "Versioned evidence view for versioned assessment profile, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-uncertainty", "name": "Uncertainty", "description": "Record dimension results with method, evidence sufficiency and uncertainty. Unknown, unassessed, failed and not applicable are distinct states. A numeric score is optional and is not a probability unless calibration is justified for the stated population.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty", "name": "Observed values and limitations", "description": "Record dimension results with method, evidence sufficiency and uncertainty. Unknown, unassessed, failed and not applicable are distinct states. A numeric score is optional and is not a probability unless calibration is justified for the stated population.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-q1", "text": "Which values and explicit missingness states were observed for each dimension?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "dimension_values", "missingness_states", "observation_method" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-q2", "text": "What calibration evidence and applicability limits justify interpreting a score?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "calibration_reference", "population", "uncertainty", "limitations" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-q3", "text": "How were evaluator bias, dependent evidence and unsupported precision checked?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "review_method", "dependence_treatment", "bias_checks", "precision_limits" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-d1", "name": "dimension_results", "description": "Candidate field for observed values and limitations. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-d2", "name": "uncertainty_statement", "description": "Candidate field for observed values and limitations. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-uncertainty-artifact", "name": "Dimension result worksheet", "description": "Versioned evidence view for observed values and limitations, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "mta-b-risk", "name": "Adverse evidence", "description": "Represent doubts and security signals without assuming enforcement authority.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-contradiction", "name": "Contrary material", "description": "Retain references to material counterevidence and the unresolved parts of the judgment. Conflict precedence remains external policy; an assessment cannot erase contrary memory or claim consensus from repeated evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-contradiction", "name": "Contradiction and challenge record", "description": "Retain references to material counterevidence and the unresolved parts of the judgment. Conflict precedence remains external policy; an assessment cannot erase contrary memory or claim consensus from repeated evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-q1", "text": "Which claims have material counterevidence relevant to this use?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "contested_claims", "counterevidence_references", "relevance_rationale" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-q2", "text": "Which conflict rule was referenced and what uncertainty remains after its application?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "conflict_rule_reference", "external_resolution_reference", "remaining_uncertainty" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-q3", "text": "How can an affected or relying role challenge the recorded judgment?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "challenge_route", "reviewer_role", "challenge_reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-d1", "name": "counterevidence", "description": "Candidate field for contradiction and challenge record. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-d2", "name": "challenge_state", "description": "Candidate field for contradiction and challenge record. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-contradiction-artifact", "name": "Contrary evidence memorandum", "description": "Versioned evidence view for contradiction and challenge record, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-contamination", "name": "Contamination signals", "description": "Record supplied indicators that memory may be contaminated, instruction-bearing or manipulated. The assessment can recommend restricted reliance or referral; incident investigation, quarantine and content redaction stay in their own models.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-contamination", "name": "Policy-level poisoning indicators", "description": "Record supplied indicators that memory may be contaminated, instruction-bearing or manipulated. The assessment can recommend restricted reliance or referral; incident investigation, quarantine and content redaction stay in their own models.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-contamination-q1", "text": "Which policy-level indicators require review of this memory before reliance?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "indicator_categories", "detection_reference", "review_requirement" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contamination-q2", "text": "What prevents remembered content or a source assertion from changing the assessment policy?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "policy_origin", "policy_change_authority", "data_instruction_boundary" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contamination-q3", "text": "Which incident or quarantine referral is appropriate when evidence is suspicious or inconclusive?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "referral_type", "referral_reference", "reason", "inconclusive_state" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-contamination-d1", "name": "risk_indicators", "description": "Candidate field for policy-level poisoning indicators. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-contamination-d2", "name": "referral_recommendation", "description": "Candidate field for policy-level poisoning indicators. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-contamination-artifact", "name": "Contamination review note", "description": "Versioned evidence view for policy-level poisoning indicators, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "mta-b-decision", "name": "Assessment outcome", "description": "Expose scoped recommendations and their bounded period of usefulness.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-judgment", "name": "Judgment", "description": "Record qualified, not qualified, insufficient evidence or review required as local candidate outcome codes. Each outcome binds a subject, use, rationale and accountable assessor. It does not itself authorize recall, disclosure or tool execution.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-judgment", "name": "Scoped trust recommendation", "description": "Record qualified, not qualified, insufficient evidence or review required as local candidate outcome codes. Each outcome binds a subject, use, rationale and accountable assessor. It does not itself authorize recall, disclosure or tool execution.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-judgment-q1", "text": "Which outcome is supported for each assessed target and intended use?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "outcome_code", "target_reference", "use_context", "rationale" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-judgment-q2", "text": "Who issued the recommendation and what independent review or override is recorded?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "assessor_reference", "review_reference", "override_authority", "override_reason" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-judgment-q3", "text": "Which separate access grant and context policy must the relying process check?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "sharing_grant_reference", "context_policy_reference", "permission_check_requirement" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-judgment-d1", "name": "judgments", "description": "Candidate field for scoped trust recommendation. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-judgment-d2", "name": "assessor_reference", "description": "Candidate field for scoped trust recommendation. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-judgment-artifact", "name": "Trust recommendation record", "description": "Versioned evidence view for scoped trust recommendation, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-freshness", "name": "Temporal validity", "description": "Distinguish evidence time, assessment time, observation time and a profile-defined review deadline. A new memory revision, revoked evidence or changed policy prevents silent reuse; stale assessments are not automatically negative truth judgments.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-001" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-freshness", "name": "Freshness and invalidation conditions", "description": "Distinguish evidence time, assessment time, observation time and a profile-defined review deadline. A new memory revision, revoked evidence or changed policy prevents silent reuse; stale assessments are not automatically negative truth judgments.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-001" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-freshness-q1", "text": "When were the evidence and assessment produced and when were they observed?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "evidence_time", "assessment_time", "observed_at", "clock_uncertainty" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-freshness-q2", "text": "Which expiry, revocation or target change makes this recommendation unusable?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "valid_until", "invalidation_conditions", "target_revision", "status_reference" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-freshness-q3", "text": "What reassessment trigger and delivery acknowledgment are recorded for affected consumers?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "trigger_event", "reassessment_reference", "consumer_reference", "acknowledgment" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-freshness-d1", "name": "validity_envelope", "description": "Candidate field for freshness and invalidation conditions. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-001" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-freshness-d2", "name": "invalidation_events", "description": "Candidate field for freshness and invalidation conditions. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-001" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-freshness-artifact", "name": "Assessment validity envelope", "description": "Versioned evidence view for freshness and invalidation conditions, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-001" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "mta-b-governance", "name": "Review and record governance", "description": "Govern the assessment record without taking ownership of the underlying memory.", "rationale": "Proposed grouping for an inspectable memory trust assessment; cited sources ground concepts, not a mandatory hierarchy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "layers": [ { "id": "mta-l-revision", "name": "Review history", "description": "Draft, reviewed, superseded and withdrawn are proposed assessment lifecycle states, separate from the trust outcome. Preserve reasons for changes while protecting sensitive evidence and acknowledging that review may be self-review only.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-revision", "name": "Assessment revision and supersession", "description": "Draft, reviewed, superseded and withdrawn are proposed assessment lifecycle states, separate from the trust outcome. Preserve reasons for changes while protecting sensitive evidence and acknowledging that review may be self-review only.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-revision-q1", "text": "Which assessment revision is current and which earlier judgment does it supersede?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "revision_id", "lifecycle_state", "supersedes_reference" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-revision-q2", "text": "Which evidence or policy change explains this revision and who approved it?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "change_reason", "changed_dependencies", "approval_reference" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-revision-q3", "text": "Which review was independent and which was performed by the original assessor?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "reviewer_reference", "independence_status", "review_limits" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-revision-d1", "name": "revision_record", "description": "Candidate field for assessment revision and supersession. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-revision-d2", "name": "review_record", "description": "Candidate field for assessment revision and supersession. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-revision-artifact", "name": "Assessment review history", "description": "Versioned evidence view for assessment revision and supersession, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "mta-l-disclosure", "name": "Disclosure and disposal", "description": "Limit disclosure of sensitive source identities, allegations and supporting memory. The local record follows an adopting retention policy; withdrawing a recommendation is distinct from deleting its payload or erasing referenced memory.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "mta-f-disclosure", "name": "Minimal assessment view and retention", "description": "Limit disclosure of sensitive source identities, allegations and supporting memory. The local record follows an adopting retention policy; withdrawing a recommendation is distinct from deleting its payload or erasing referenced memory.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-q1", "text": "Which minimal assessment view can each recipient receive without exposing restricted evidence?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "recipient_scope", "redaction_rules", "evidence_access_references" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-q2", "text": "Which retention basis, disposal deadline and authorized hold apply to assessment payloads?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "retention_policy_reference", "disposal_due", "hold_basis" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-q3", "text": "What must an export preserve about judgment scope, missing evidence and later withdrawal?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "export_profile", "preserved_fields", "unavailable_evidence_markers", "withdrawal_reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-d1", "name": "disclosure_profile", "description": "Candidate field for minimal assessment view and retention. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-d2", "name": "retention_binding", "description": "Candidate field for minimal assessment view and retention. Its nested members are elicited by the questions; an executable instance schema is deferred.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "mta-f-disclosure-artifact", "name": "Assessment disclosure and disposal record", "description": "Versioned evidence view for minimal assessment view and retention, with references and explicit unknowns. Raw memory payloads are not required copies.", "media_or_form": [ "structured record", "human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system identifier, then governed IRI, then assigned UUID; bind assessment and artifact revision. A timestamp or digest alone is not identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] } ] }, "functions": [ { "id": "mta-op-register", "name": "Register assessment draft", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Bind a subject revision and declared use to a new local assessment identifier.", "inputs": [ "master subject reference", "use context", "policy reference" ], "outputs": [ "draft assessment or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Subject identity and use context are sufficiently resolved." ], "effects": [ "Create a local draft; do not modify the target memory." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "mta-op-attach", "name": "Record evidence observations", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Attach authorized evidence references, checks and contrary material without executing checks or resolving truth.", "inputs": [ "assessment revision", "evidence references", "observation results" ], "outputs": [ "revised evidence index or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Evidence access and observer attribution are established." ], "effects": [ "Append observations and unknowns; do not fetch restricted payloads or count duplicates as independent evidence." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "mta-op-record", "name": "Record dimension appraisal", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Record externally produced or human-supplied values under a pinned method; this is not an implemented scoring engine.", "inputs": [ "dimension results", "method revision", "uncertainty statement" ], "outputs": [ "versioned appraisal record or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Dimensions, missingness and scales match the bound profile." ], "effects": [ "Store values with limitations; reject an unexplained probability or silent missing-value imputation." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "mta-op-recommend", "name": "Record scoped recommendation", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Store an authorized assessor recommendation and its justification.", "inputs": [ "target judgments", "rationale", "assessor reference", "validity envelope" ], "outputs": [ "recommendation revision or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Minimum evidence and exclusion rules are evaluated by the authorized process; failed or unknown prerequisites prevent positive recommendation." ], "effects": [ "Record the outcome; do not grant access, execute tools or release quarantine." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "mta-op-reassess", "name": "Mark reassessment required", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Record dependency changes and local invalidation of reuse eligibility.", "inputs": [ "changed dependency reference", "trigger observation", "current revision" ], "outputs": [ "stale marker and proposed reassessment link or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Trigger is attributable and applies to this target, policy or evidence." ], "effects": [ "Mark reuse pending review; no automatic claim that all target content is false and no unacknowledged consumer-delivery claim." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "mta-op-supersede", "name": "Supersede or withdraw assessment", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented: Record an accountable revision or withdrawal reason while leaving target memory unchanged.", "inputs": [ "current revision", "replacement reference or withdrawal reason", "approval" ], "outputs": [ "supersession record or refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized role, tenant and purpose; expected current revision must match.", "Authorized reviewer approves the transition; retention and holds are checked separately." ], "effects": [ "Update local assessment status and reference history; payload disposal remains a separate authorized process." ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "composition": [ { "target": "WM-XCT-026", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Registry parent is a candidate alignment to generic quality, score and method concepts; this model specializes target-specific memory assessment records without asserting inherited runtime behavior. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-002", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "The memory item owns its content, validity and lifecycle. This record refers to an exact item revision and never changes it by rating it. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-006", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Formation and extraction are evidence references; formation confidence is not automatically this use-specific trust judgment. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-009", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Conflict resolution authority and rule lifecycle remain external. Here record contrary evidence and reference a rule or resolution. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-010", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "The assessment binds an applicable retention policy; memory erasure is not performed by its assessment operations. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-011", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Access permission is separately checked; a positive trust recommendation cannot grant read or write access. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-017", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Context instructions and precedence rules remain independently mastered and cannot be supplied or modified by remembered content. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-019", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Suspicion and referral can be recorded here. Investigation, quarantine, release and redaction are externally owned actions. Candidate local binding; adopting profiles must pin the neighbor specification. Evidence supports the distinction, not this repository identifier.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-020", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Optional quarantine or redaction referral reference only; its enforcement and lifecycle remain separate. Candidate binding requires a pinned profile.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] } ], "serviceLayers": { "dimension": { "owner_package_requirements": [ "Identify the accountable memory governance role and assessment custodian without vendor ownership assumptions.", "Pin namespace, assessment profile, access grants and retention policy in the adopting Dimension.", "Declare subject-master bindings, evaluator authority, review routes and allowed use contexts." ], "namespace_guidance": "Use an adopting-Dimension namespace with stable assessment, judgment and artifact identifiers; revisions are separately addressable.", "registry_links": [ "vr.wm-mem-018", "Candidate parent alignment: WM-XCT-026", "Candidate memory and policy references require version pins before operational use." ] }, "canon_and_patch": { "canonicalization_rules": [ "Keep target kind, target revision, purpose, profile revision and judgment separate; do not collapse source reliability into content credibility.", "Preserve explicit unknown, failed, not applicable and unassessed states; never canonicalize them to a passing numeric value." ], "patch_rules": [ "Require expected revision and author identity; changes to evidence, scope, method or outcome produce a new revision with reason.", "Reject memory-supplied instructions that attempt to alter policy or elevate assessment authority." ], "compatibility_rules": [ "Changes to score meaning, scale, target type or use scope require explicit migration and reassessment.", "Preserve loss reports and unmapped dimensions when importing external metrics; alignment is not conformance." ] }, "artifact_rules": { "identity_priority": [ "Authoritative master-system identifier", "Governed global identifier or IRI", "UUID or ULID assigned by the adopting Dimension" ], "timestamp_rule": "Use RFC 3339 with seconds and explicit offset or Z. Separate evidence event time, assessment time and observation or ingestion time; preserve clock uncertainty.", "serial_naming_rule": "Name serial artifacts with stable assessment and artifact identifiers plus revision; dates are optional display metadata and never sole keys.", "integrity_rule": "Record digest algorithm, digest scope, verifier and observation result when supplied. A digest detects byte change only within its verified scope; signatures and authenticity do not establish factual truth." }, "policies": [ "This is a proposed research structure; operational use needs a pinned instance profile and qualified review.", "Keep content data distinct from governing instructions; no trust label grants permissions or overrides quarantine.", "Use minimum necessary evidence references and protect allegations and source identity from broader disclosure.", "Safety-sensitive recommendations require the adopting policy to define escalation and refusal; no universal score or threshold is supplied." ], "crud": { "read": [ "Check recipient, tenant, purpose and evidence visibility at every hierarchy level; return unavailable evidence markers without leaking payloads." ], "create": [ "Create drafts only with identified targets, use context, profile and accountable role; unknown observations are permitted and visible." ], "update": [ "Require expected revision and authority; retain permitted history and mark affected judgments for reassessment when dependencies change." ], "delete": [ "Follow the assessment retention policy, authorized holds and lawful disposal basis. Remove eligible payloads through the adopting custodian process and retain only minimal permitted tombstones; immutable history never requires indefinite personal-data retention.", "Deleting or withdrawing this assessment does not delete referenced memory, revoke a credential or execute quarantine; those operations belong to the referenced masters." ] }, "roles": [ { "name": "Assessment custodian", "responsibilities": [ "Maintain local record identity, scope, revision and retention bindings." ] }, { "name": "Assessor", "responsibilities": [ "Document evidence, method, uncertainty and purpose-specific recommendations within granted authority." ] }, { "name": "Reviewer", "responsibilities": [ "Challenge evidence dependence, exclusions and scope; label independence accurately." ] }, { "name": "Relying process operator", "responsibilities": [ "Check current assessment validity, permissions and context policy before use." ] }, { "name": "Policy owner", "responsibilities": [ "Approve profiles, escalation thresholds and retention constraints without changing past evidence." ] } ], "access": { "default_rule": "Deny by default except for explicitly authorized role, purpose and tenant; a positive trust label is not an access grant.", "scopes": [ "bundle", "layer", "finding", "artifact" ], "exceptions": [ "A documented emergency exception must have authority, scope and expiry and cannot silently expose restricted evidence.", "Unavailable evidence may be represented by a minimal restricted reference where policy permits; consumers must see the resulting assessment limitation." ], "audit_requirements": [ "Record actor, purpose, target, revision, policy basis, time and local result for reads or mutations as required by the adopting audit policy.", "Record recommendation consumption and withdrawal acknowledgments only when observed; do not assume delivery." ] }, "agents_bootstrap": { "filename": "AGENTS.md", "required_fields": [ "Name", "Type", "Specification URL", "Storage type URL", "Interface URL", "Processes URL" ], "read_order": [ "Read the adopting Dimension and nearest AGENTS.md.", "Read spec.yaml, review status and publication holds.", "Resolve profile, target revision, evidence visibility and policy references before populating any assessment." ] } }, "coverage": { "claim": "Source-grounded proposed memory trust assessment record with separate content and source judgments, contextual reliance, explicit uncertainty and external authority boundaries. A separate frozen no-tools local self-audit found no critical conflicts. Reviewable draft only; source versions, independent review, calibration and operational conformance remain open.", "confidence": "medium", "checklist": [ { "dimension": "identity", "status": "covered", "notes": "Assessment and artifact identities are separate from memory and source identities." }, { "dimension": "lifecycle", "status": "covered", "notes": "Draft, reviewed, superseded and withdrawn are proposed record states distinct from trust outcomes." }, { "dimension": "relationships", "status": "covered", "notes": "Registry parent qualified; no relation-ledger rows exist for this model at freeze. Proposed references remain optional and unpinned." }, { "dimension": "temporal", "status": "covered", "notes": "Evidence, assessment and observation times plus invalidation conditions are explicit." }, { "dimension": "provenance", "status": "covered", "notes": "Formation, derivation, attribution and evidence dependence are inspectable." }, { "dimension": "ownership", "status": "covered", "notes": "Assessment custodian and policy owner are roles; neighboring domain authority stays external." }, { "dimension": "validation", "status": "gap", "notes": "Research structure is schema-validated; instance schemas and operational conformance remain gaps." }, { "dimension": "access", "status": "covered", "notes": "Purpose, tenant and hierarchy-scoped visibility are independent of trust judgments." }, { "dimension": "retention and deletion", "status": "covered", "notes": "Assessment disposal follows a referenced policy; source memory erasure remains separate." }, { "dimension": "interoperability", "status": "gap", "notes": "PROV-O and DQV alignments are conceptual; credential evidence and RATS analogy are qualified." }, { "dimension": "physical properties", "status": "not-applicable", "notes": "The root is an informational assessment with no intrinsic mass or geometry; source location, if relevant, is a contextual evidence reference." }, { "dimension": "calibration", "status": "gap", "notes": "No universal scoring scale, calibrated probability, benchmark or error rate is asserted." } ], "known_omissions": [ "Executable nested instance schemas, enum definitions and pinned neighbor bindings are unfinished.", "No empirically calibrated scoring method, benchmark or automatic truth detector is provided.", "Jurisdiction-specific privacy, retention, sensitive-use and dispute obligations need adopting-profile review.", "Independent external review is absent; the later no-tools audit is a local self-audit.", "Live direct HTTP status, immutable living-source revisions and exhaustive claim verification remain open." ], "conflicts": [], "regional_assumptions": [ "No jurisdiction is presumed. Operational profiles must resolve privacy, retention, sensitive-use restrictions and review authority.", "Open specifications supply concepts; none defines a universal memory trust assessment standard." ], "adversarial_checks": [ "A signed but false claim must not become fact merely through successful verification.", "A repeated summary with one origin must not be counted as independent corroboration.", "A changed memory revision, revoked source evidence or changed policy must prevent silent reuse.", "A high source score cannot override access denial, quarantine or governing context policy.", "Missing evidence remains unknown; a low score and no score are different.", "Historical records cannot justify retaining sensitive payloads forever." ] }, "researchAdjudication": { "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "activeProviders": [ "codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "claude", "grok" ], "providerPolicy": { "contract_version": "1.0.0", "mode": "single-provider-waiver", "effective_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "scope": "Canonical single-stream subject-model research after the six-workstream consolidation", "active_providers": [ "codex" ], "waived_providers": [ { "provider": "claude", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "Claude produced no result on prior 1800-second and 900-second attempts and again timed out on bounded 600-second Sonnet and 300-second Haiku passes. The owner prioritized completion over provider availability." }, { "provider": "grok", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "The repository owner authorized completion without Grok when Grok is unavailable, slow or schema-invalid. Grok may still be attempted as a bounded supplemental reviewer, but its failure never blocks a valid Claude plus no-tools result." } ], "review_rule": "Codex may complete source-grounded fallback research after bounded Claude and Grok attempts fail. It requires a separate no-tools adversarial audit and remains reviewable-draft with a visible absence-of-external-review hold.", "supplemental_provider_attempts": [ { "provider": "claude", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." }, { "provider": "grok", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." } ] }, "boundaryDecision": { "entry_kind": "entity", "status": "accepted", "rationale": "The root is a persistently identified and revisable assessment record. The activity that creates a judgment and the relationship to its subject have separate identities. The registry standalone-mm category is not a subject-kind enum. Generic quality remains a candidate alignment; memory content and governing policies remain externally mastered." }, "decisions": [ { "concept": "Assessment record root", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Identity, revision, assessor and outcome semantics consistently describe an entity rather than replacing the root with an assessment event or source relationship." }, { "concept": "Source and memory target judgments", "disposition": "accepted with separation", "rationale": "Combined assessments retain separately labeled judgments. Source reliability cannot silently transfer to the factual credibility of a memory revision." }, { "concept": "Authenticity and truth", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Observed integrity and credential results remain evidence. A signature or digest alone cannot prove claim truth or establish authorization." }, { "concept": "Dependent evidence and counterevidence", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Lineage questions expose shared origins and circular support; contrary material stays visible and conflict precedence is referenced rather than redefined." }, { "concept": "Score semantics and unknowns", "disposition": "qualified", "rationale": "Dimension results preserve missingness and method context. Numeric values are optional and require calibration support before being interpreted as probabilities; no universal threshold is asserted." }, { "concept": "Profile and scoring boundary", "disposition": "limited to recording", "rationale": "The proposed functions store supplied observations and judgments under external profiles. They do not implement scoring, credential evaluation or runtime enforcement." }, { "concept": "Access and policy authority", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Trust labels cannot override grants, quarantine or context policies. Remembered instructions have no authority to alter the governing assessment policy." }, { "concept": "Security incident scope", "disposition": "referral only", "rationale": "Contamination indicators and recommendations are policy-level records. Investigation, quarantine, release and redaction stay in neighboring models with separately pinned authority." }, { "concept": "Temporal reuse and withdrawal", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Evidence, assessment and observation times differ; dependency changes invalidate reuse. Staleness is not falsity and consumer delivery is recorded only when acknowledged." }, { "concept": "Assessment privacy and retention", "disposition": "qualified by adopting policy", "rationale": "Assessment allegations and source identities are protected as well as raw evidence. History preservation is bounded by authorized payload disposal and minimal permitted tombstones." }, { "concept": "Artifact identity and concurrency", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Master identity precedes fallback identifiers, date and digest are not sole keys, and proposed mutations require expected revision and accountable authority." }, { "concept": "Source status and applicability", "disposition": "limited", "rationale": "The six browser-accessed sources ground concepts only. DQV is a Note, RATS is an analogy, living revisions are unpinned, and no direct HTTP requests or exhaustive current-version checks occurred." }, { "concept": "Instance and integration conformance", "disposition": "deferred", "rationale": "Candidate object fields, optional neighbor links and conceptual vocabulary mappings are insufficient for executable validation or operational interoperability without profiles and fixtures." }, { "concept": "Independent review", "disposition": "waived and held", "rationale": "Claude and Grok were skipped under the owner override. This frozen semantic self-audit is separate work by Codex and cannot be represented as independent external review." } ], "publicationHolds": [ "Independent external review is absent under the owner-authorized single-provider waiver. Claude and Grok were skipped with zero attempts; the separate local Codex no-tools self-audit is not a second-provider review.", "Live source and version verification is incomplete. Six sources were accessed as selected browser text; direct HTTP checks were not attempted because the owner reports sandbox restrictions. Zero measured HTTP 200 responses is not evidence of six failed requests. The coordinator must run check_sources.py outside the sandbox and review source revisions and claim support.", "Executable nested instance schemas, version-pinned neighbor bindings, vocabulary mappings and adversarial acceptance fixtures are unfinished. No runtime implementation or conformance certification is claimed.", "Scoring profiles, empirical calibration, decision thresholds, sensitive-use escalation, and applicable privacy and retention obligations require adopting-profile validation before operational use. No universal trust score or automated truth determination is provided.", "Independent external review was explicitly waived by the repository owner; this codex-only result remains a reviewable draft." ], "deferredResearch": [ "Verify exact source editions, errata and immutable revisions, then review each admitted claim and record direct HTTP evidence separately.", "Define and test instance profiles and mappings for separate source and content targets, shared evidence origins, unknown checks, policy changes, revocation, access denial, challenge and lawful disposal.", "Evaluate calibration and decision behavior in each intended use context, including false confidence and uncertainty propagation, without assuming a common probability scale.", "Restore independent external review before canonical or publishable-draft promotion." ] }, "statistics": { "sources": 6, "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 12, "questions": 36, "artifacts": 12, "functions": 6 } }