artifacts/standard-named

HI-7 Validation Report

artifacts/standard-named/20260715__TELIC-FIELDS__VALIDATION-REPORT__WORKING__HI-7__structural-and-semantic-validation.md

Rendered from markdown source. Open raw source on GitHub.

HI-7 Validation Report

Status: completed Validation date: 2026-07-15

Schema validation

Twelve candidate Draft 2020-12 schemas were checked:

  • public-field-assembly.schema.json
  • standing-admission-record.schema.json
  • option-set-witness.schema.json
  • protected-condition-declaration.schema.json
  • deliberative-assertion-record.schema.json
  • decision-rule-portfolio.schema.json
  • route-portfolio.schema.json
  • dissent-minority-trail.schema.json
  • cost-delay-bearer-map.schema.json
  • abstention-no-decision-record.schema.json
  • public-decision-witness.schema.json
  • consequence-return-revision.schema.json

Result:

schemas checked: 12
schema errors: 0

Positive demonstrations

All eight required demonstrations passed:

  1. an excluded route became visible and entered the option set;
  2. minority standing remained represented without becoming automatic veto;
  3. a protected condition blocked ordinary compensatory tradeoff;
  4. majority, weighted, outranking, and robust methods produced visibly different comparisons;
  5. a route portfolio preserved several forms of access;
  6. a no-decision state identified delay bearers and temporary protection;
  7. dissent remained attached to the selected route;
  8. observed consequence returned to the field and reopened navigation.

Result:

positive demonstrations passed: 8
positive failures: 0

Negative conformance cases

All twelve prohibited patterns were detected:

  1. fictional collective utility;
  2. option omission represented as participant rejection;
  3. hidden model authorship;
  4. protected condition represented as an ordinary weight;
  5. consensus represented as universal consent;
  6. majority represented as complete legitimacy;
  7. method treated as neutral and unwitnessed;
  8. dissent deleted after decision;
  9. abstention counted as support;
  10. no-decision represented without delay bearers;
  11. portfolio burden shifted invisibly to vulnerable centers;
  12. observed consequence left outside the original decision record.

Result:

negative cases detected: 12
undetected negative cases: 0

Public DecisionWitness

The event-generated PublicDecisionWitness preserves:

  • field scope;
  • standing admissions;
  • option construction and authorship;
  • protected conditions;
  • deliberative assertions and correction;
  • decision-method comparison;
  • route portfolio;
  • selected action and authority;
  • cost and delay bearers;
  • dissent;
  • no-decision state;
  • implementation conditions;
  • review triggers.

Result:

public decision witness: PASS
generated_from_events: true
dissent preserved: true
option authorship preserved: true

Independent public-decision export

The export contains:

  • public-field assembly;
  • standing records;
  • option-set witness;
  • protected condition;
  • assertions and corrections;
  • decision-rule portfolio;
  • route portfolio;
  • dissent trail;
  • cost and delay map;
  • no-decision record;
  • eight demonstrations;
  • event stream;
  • PublicDecisionWitness;
  • schemas;
  • manifest;
  • checksums.

Result:

checksum files verified: 32
checksum failures: 0
independent of deliberation platform: true

Public-page consistency review

H.7 was checked against I.7 for the following claims:

  • one action does not imply one public purpose;
  • standing precedes counting;
  • option construction is constitutional power;
  • protected conditions differ from heavily weighted preferences;
  • weights and methods remain claims rather than neutral facts;
  • portfolios may preserve plurality but may shift burden;
  • minority standing does not create automatic veto;
  • dissent remains part of the decision;
  • abstention is not agreement;
  • no-decision has delay bearers;
  • observed consequence returns to public judgment.

Result:

technical/public contradictions found: 0

Scope of validation

This report establishes structural and internal semantic validation only.

It does not establish:

  • legal standing or voting eligibility;
  • one valid democratic decision rule;
  • universal protected conditions;
  • fairness of the county clinic example;
  • completeness of affected-center discovery;
  • neutrality of facilitation;
  • production security;
  • public-reader comprehension;
  • scientific proof of the broader framework.

Conditions before production use

  • authenticate standing and representation sources;
  • define domain-specific protected-condition authority;
  • implement public challenge to option construction;
  • expose model-generated option authorship;
  • compare at least two materially different decision methods;
  • test burden allocation in route portfolios;
  • implement dissent-preserving publication and privacy controls;
  • return observed consequence to the original witness;
  • conduct independent reader testing of H.1 through H.7.