This is the original English entry page, not a full translation. The full Russian source is linked below.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Artifact id | MM_A0206 (permanent) |
| Entry page revision | MM_A0206-entry-en-r1 |
| Full text | Russian original, language: Russian |
| Status | scientific draft (concept_draft); not a finished result |
| Licence | CC BY 4.0 |
Abstract
The paper proposes a general Knowledge Contract (KC) v3 interface linking addressable content to purpose, conditions, grounds, dependencies and rules of use. Nine core groups are extended by six selective profiles. The professional profile separates a unit of work (WorkItem), role (Role), skill description (Skill), solution scheme (Blueprint), executor capability, current authority, attempt and evidence. For a bounded interchange format the authors implemented a JSON Schema, consistency checks, consumer compatibility, current-use evaluation and a v2 subset migration. It is finite and works on trusted, interpreted JSON input.
Claims and their basis
- The authors' first run passed 35/35 contract scenarios. A control set passed 26/26. Basis type: finite-test. The control set was composed by a separate agent of the same session from the public interface; it is not external verification. One control intent is unmapped and five are partly mapped; the gap list after that count was NOT read by the card writer.
- Two authors' cases and four control cases with false trusted inputs were accepted. They show the model boundary, outside the main figure. Basis type: finite-test.
- A diagnostic ablation without part of the checks scored 3/9 against 9/9; it is not a strong baseline. An exploratory comparison with a strong plain form, prepared after first results were disclosed, scored 9/9 on both sides; its evidence file (MM_A0790) was NOT read. Basis type: finite-test.
- A strong plain alternative gave the same result in 30 targeted-revision pairs (negative). Basis type: finite-test; the underlying report was not read.
- The distinctions among role, skill description, solution scheme, capability and authority are definitions. Basis type: authors-domain-assessment.
- RU10 cross-check, by the kit authors and one assistant: 107 entries of the r1 delivery use valid AKP forms. The r2 set has 110 entries, after three competence descriptions were added. In r1, 14 of 14 retained results were re-mapped to the contract. An empty
Blueprintlist in the first adapter was fixed. Basis type: authors-domain-assessment. - The central proposal is a hypothesis; H01-H04 are planned, not executed. Basis type: hypothesis.
Limits
- Source markup correctness and external authority are not established by the validator.
- Speed, cost and minimality of groups and profiles are not measured.
- The check records no revision or hash of the contract.
- Authors, composer and assessors share one session.
- Migration covers one historical shape; semantic equivalence stays
not_established(the migration report MM_A0804 not read; the claim rests on the read MM_A0810).
Status and what is open
- The late research synthesis gate is open.
- Independent semantic review of this text has not been performed.
- The English page is a summary, not a translation, and does not replace the Russian original.
- Not integrated and still missing: the NAV reports, the TIM reports, MM_OBLIGATIONS_20261030 together with the previous-stage report, the runs behind section 7 of the knowledge-admission amendment (MM_KA0004), and the items ING-01 to ING-08.
- The crosswalk content is a one-assistant self-check, not independent confirmation.
- Held: the edition says another team member composed the control set, the review says an agent of the same session (this page follows the review); the amendment speaks of seven profiles, the edition lists six.
Relation to the full text
The Russian full text is the terminology edition of 2026-11-03 (front matter, links aside). Its abstract understates executed results; this page follows the corrected wording of the editorial review. The Russian text is published without the card corrections, so its abstract may differ from this page.
Credit and licence
Based on Knowledge Contract Arcana, https://contract.place (CC BY 4.0). Licence: CC BY 4.0. Credit lines and how to cite: ATTRIBUTION.md; rights holder statement for the repository: NOTICE; third-party sources: SOURCES.md.
By Pavel Valentov · Knowledge Contract Arcana · CC BY 4.0. Text retained; presentation adapted. Open the original source
