{ "schemaVersion": "27.3", "engineVersion": "1.5.0", "cockpitSchemaVersion": "titan-cockpit/27.2.0", "capabilityStandardVersion": "2.3", "released": "2026-07-16", "compatibility": { "coreScoreVersion": "25.0", "coreCalculationContract": "1.2", "bridgeRulesVersion": "1.3", "frozenCoreScore": true, "coreDomainCount": 24, "equalLayerWeighting": true, "policy": "Capability Standard 2.3 is additive to the frozen v25 Core and calculation contract 1.2. Its 16 operational modules remain separately assessed; lifecycle state, declaration receipts, rating reliability and safety history do not alter historical Core scores or manufacture evidence.", "legacyRegistry": "titan_capabilities_v26.json" }, "measurementStandard": { "portfolioAverageAllowed": false, "notAssessedIsZero": false, "rules": [ "Record not assessed separately from level 1.", "Use the module-specific anchor, not a general impression.", "Level 3 requires a recorded direct result.", "Level 4 requires delayed retention and a predeclared transfer result.", "Level 5 requires robust performance across defined constraints plus explanation, teaching or independent-assessment evidence as the module requires.", "Record burden, support, adverse events and data coverage beside performance.", "Record lifecycle state separately from L1-L5; maintenance is a verified relationship between comparable assessments, never a sixth level.", "When a subjective human rating is claim-critical, lock the rubric and agreement rule before observation and retain the independent pre-adjudication ratings." ], "genericAnchors": { "1": "Baseline: performance is inconsistent or requires substantial support.", "2": "Supported: the trained task is reliable only under narrow or supported conditions.", "3": "Functional: the defined direct-performance criterion is met consistently.", "4": "Transfer: the gain is retained and appears on a predeclared novel task or context.", "5": "Robust: performance holds across defined constraints and the method can be explained or taught safely." }, "populationNormsPolicy": "Population ranks and percentiles never determine a Titan level, badge, worth or global comparison. A validated instrument-specific reference may be stored as non-scoring safety, referral or criterion-selection metadata only for the population and purpose it supports; it never replaces predeclared direct, retention and transfer evidence." }, "families": [ { "id": "CAP-PERCEPTION-NAV", "name": "Perception, Spatial Cognition & Sensorimotor Navigation", "purpose": "Extract useful information from the environment, construct spatial models and convert perception into safe action.", "exclusions": "No claim of a new biological sense, unsupervised hazard navigation or universal sensory enhancement.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SENSORY-DISCRIMINATION", "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION", "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE" ] }, { "id": "CAP-LEARNING-META", "name": "Learning, Memory, Creativity & Metacognition", "purpose": "Acquire, retain, retrieve, transfer, generate and accurately monitor knowledge and skill.", "exclusions": "No photographic memory, general-IQ increase, guaranteed genius or unlimited attention claim.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER", "MOD-METACOGNITIVE-CALIBRATION", "MOD-CREATIVE-COGNITION", "MOD-PROSPECTIVE-MEMORY" ] }, { "id": "CAP-DECISION-CAUSAL", "name": "Quantitative, Decision & Causal Intelligence", "purpose": "Estimate uncertainty, choose actions, test causal explanations and learn from resolved outcomes.", "exclusions": "No immunity to bias, certainty from a probability or replacement for qualified professional advice.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FORECASTING", "MOD-CAUSAL-EXPERIMENTAL" ] }, { "id": "CAP-COMMUNICATION", "name": "Communication, Argument & Negotiation", "purpose": "Listen, explain, teach, test claims, negotiate and repair understanding without sacrificing truth or consent.", "exclusions": "No coercion, manipulation, harassment, deception or exploitation of vulnerability.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-ARGUMENTATION", "MOD-TEACHING-NEGOTIATION" ] }, { "id": "CAP-COLLABORATION", "name": "Collaboration & Collective Intelligence", "purpose": "Combine independent information, expertise, dissent, coordination and shared memory into better group performance.", "exclusions": "A group property must not be presented as an individual personality score or inferred from identity.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-TEAM-ORCHESTRATION" ] }, { "id": "CAP-MAKING-OPS", "name": "Making, Tool Use & Operations", "purpose": "Diagnose, make, maintain and operate physical or procedural systems with verification, fallbacks and safe escalation.", "exclusions": "No competence claim for regulated or high-energy work outside training.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR", "MOD-OPERATIONAL-SYSTEMS" ] }, { "id": "CAP-HUMAN-TECH", "name": "Human–Technology Augmentation", "purpose": "Select and govern assistive or AI tools so the combined system improves outcomes without losing safety, ownership or skill.", "exclusions": "No assumption that adding AI or a device automatically improves performance.", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-HUMAN-AI-COMPLEMENTARITY", "MOD-ASSISTIVE-FIT" ] } ], "modules": [ { "id": "MOD-SENSORY-DISCRIMINATION", "familyId": "CAP-PERCEPTION-NAV", "name": "Sensory Discrimination & Substitution", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Variable", "scope": "Task-specific visual, auditory, olfactory, tactile or substitution learning under controlled conditions.", "exclusions": "A trained laboratory task does not establish safe independent navigation or generally sharper senses.", "measures": { "direct": "Accuracy or threshold on a defined stimulus set.", "retention": "Repeat the same test after at least seven days.", "transfer": "Accuracy on a predeclared novel but equally safe stimulus set.", "burden": "Time, irritation, fatigue, disorientation or distress." }, "protocol": [ "Choose one channel and one controlled task.", "Establish a baseline with objective feedback.", "Practise briefly while rested.", "Repeat the test after a delay.", "Test a novel safe stimulus.", "Stop for disorientation, irritation, hearing change or distress." ], "anchors": { "1": "Baseline accuracy is unstable or near chance on the defined task.", "2": "Accuracy improves on the practised set with immediate feedback or support.", "3": "Meets the predeclared accuracy threshold on the practised set in two sessions.", "4": "Retains the threshold and meets the novel-stimulus transfer criterion.", "5": "Performance remains reliable across defined safe variations and the method can be explained without overstating its scope." }, "guardrail": "Never train blind navigation near traffic, stairs, water, heights or moving machinery. Sensory-loss training belongs with qualified rehabilitation support.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-ECHOLOCATION", "EVD-PERCEPTUAL-LEARNING", "EVD-OLFACTORY-TRAINING" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-SENSORY", "sensory-extension" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-ECHOLOCATION", "name": "Human click-based echolocation", "claim": "An intensive controlled protocol can improve defined echolocation tasks and performance on untrained task configurations; it does not establish safe independent navigation.", "direct": "Size or orientation discrimination accuracy, or virtual-maze completion time, completion rate and collisions under stationary controlled conditions.", "retention": "Repeat the same instrumented task after a declared no-practice interval. The published three-month follow-up was a real-life self-report survey, not an objective retention test.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared untrained object size, orientation or virtual route while preserving the same safety conditions.", "guardrail": "Start with stationary soft targets. Never practise blindfolded walking near roads, stairs, water, heights or hazards; retain mobility aids and qualified orientation-and-mobility support.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-ECHOLOCATION" ] }, { "id": "EX-ABSOLUTE-PITCH", "name": "Adult absolute-pitch naming", "claim": "Intensive perceptual training can improve pitch naming in adults, and a minority reach high all-pitch accuracy; success, generalisation and durability vary.", "direct": "Accuracy across all twelve pitch classes on a predeclared instrument or timbre, scored over repeated balanced trials.", "retention": "Repeat the balanced test after a declared no-practice interval of at least four weeks.", "transfer": "Test an untrained timbre or octave declared before training.", "guardrail": "Use comfortable listening levels and stop for pain, tinnitus, hearing change or distress. Never use medication or neurostimulation as a Titan training route.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-ABSOLUTE-PITCH-ADULT" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION", "familyId": "CAP-PERCEPTION-NAV", "name": "Spatial Simulation & Cognitive Maps", "status": "new", "evidenceGrade": "Strong", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Mental rotation, 2D-to-3D translation, landmark encoding, route preview, map reconstruction and mechanical visualisation.", "exclusions": "Spatial-task improvement is not a claim of general-intelligence enhancement.", "measures": { "direct": "Rotation, route, angle, landmark or reconstruction error on a defined task.", "retention": "Repeat after at least seven days without rehearsal immediately beforehand.", "transfer": "Complete a structurally related but untrained object, map or route task.", "burden": "Visual strain, motion sensitivity, headache, vertigo or fatigue." }, "protocol": [ "Select one stationary spatial task.", "Record time and error baseline.", "Practise with feedback in short blocks.", "Retest after a delay.", "Run one predeclared novel-task test.", "Use seated and non-VR variants when needed." ], "anchors": { "1": "Baseline error or completion time is unstable on the selected task.", "2": "Improves on repeated items with cues, examples or feedback.", "3": "Meets the direct error and time criterion on unprompted trained-format items.", "4": "Retains the gain and transfers it to a novel object, map or route task.", "5": "Performs across defined formats or constraints and can teach the representation strategy accurately." }, "guardrail": "Use stationary, hazard-free tasks. Do not use experimental navigation drills around traffic or other real-world hazards.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-SPATIAL-TRAINING", "EVD-SPATIAL-ASSESSMENT" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-SKETCH-MAP-ROUTE", "name": "Sketch-map reconstruction and controlled novel route", "claim": "Landmark, route and orientation representations can be practised and scored on defined maps and controlled routes; success does not establish safe independent navigation.", "direct": "Study one fixed map for a predeclared interval, remove it, then reconstruct the landmarks, junctions, route order and orientation. Score landmark recall, placement error, route-sequence error and completion time against an answer key.", "retention": "After at least seven days without using the original prompt, apply the same reconstruction method to a new matched map and repeat the identical scoring rules.", "transfer": "Preview an unfamiliar, low-risk indoor or closed pedestrian route, then complete it without personal GPS prompts while a safety companion retains the route and may stop the trial. Score wrong turns, prompts and completion time.", "guardrail": "Keep map work stationary. A route trial must be indoors or in a closed, hazard-free pedestrian setting with a safety companion; never use traffic, stairs, water, heights, wilderness or emergency routes, and never remove a mobility aid.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-SPATIAL-TRAINING", "EVD-SPATIAL-ASSESSMENT" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE", "familyId": "CAP-PERCEPTION-NAV", "name": "Sensorimotor Intelligence & Fall Resilience", "status": "new", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Professional gate", "scope": "Proprioceptive calibration, supported balance recovery, perception-to-action correction, motor imagery and approved cross-education.", "exclusions": "Not a toughness challenge, fall-risk test or replacement for rehabilitation.", "measures": { "direct": "Clinician-approved position-matching, movement-accuracy or supported recovery result.", "retention": "Repeat the approved task after the specified clinical interval.", "transfer": "Performance on a separately approved functional movement task.", "burden": "Pain, dizziness, glucose disruption, near miss, assistance required or symptom change." }, "protocol": [ "Confirm professional clearance and physical support.", "Select one approved low-risk task.", "Record baseline accuracy and symptoms.", "Practise at the prescribed dose.", "Retest only within the approved plan.", "Stop immediately for pain, dizziness, instability or new symptoms." ], "anchors": { "1": "Approved baseline task requires substantial support or is inconsistent.", "2": "Completes the approved task reliably with support and no adverse change.", "3": "Meets the clinician-defined direct criterion under the approved conditions.", "4": "Retains the gain and transfers it to a separately approved functional task.", "5": "Maintains the approved performance across defined constraints and can describe the safety sequence accurately." }, "guardrail": "Balance, perturbation or rehabilitation work requires appropriate support and clinician approval when fall, fracture, metabolic or neurological risk is present.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-PROPRIOCEPTION", "EVD-BALANCE-PERTURBATION", "EVD-CROSS-EDUCATION" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-HAZARD-PERCEPTION", "name": "Screen-based driving hazard perception", "claim": "Validated video tasks can measure latency to anticipate developing traffic hazards, and brief video-based training improved experienced drivers' test performance with the benefit still evident after at least one week. This does not establish safer on-road driving, lower crash risk or fitness to drive.", "direct": "On a one-exposure, expert-keyed set of unfamiliar licensed clips, report latency from developing-hazard onset to the first valid response, miss rate, false-response rate and invalid patterned responding. Training clips must never appear in the scored set.", "retention": "After at least seven days, use a new matched clip set with the same onset-coding, latency and error rules.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared unfamiliar screen-based set with a different road environment, weather, traffic density or jurisdiction. Transfer remains simulation-only and may not be tested through live driving, cycling or roadside exposure.", "guardrail": "Use a stationary screen and licensed or owned clips. Never practise while controlling a vehicle or near live traffic. Stop for motion sickness, migraine, seizure warning, visual strain or trauma-related distress. A Titan result is not a driving licence, eyesight assessment, medical fitness decision or proof of safe driving.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-HAZARD-PERCEPTION-VALIDATION-2010", "EVD-HAZARD-PERCEPTION-TRAINING-2013" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER", "familyId": "CAP-LEARNING-META", "name": "Learning, Memory & Skill Transfer", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Strong", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Retrieval practice, spacing, feedback, retention and transfer for defined knowledge or skill.", "exclusions": "No photographic-memory, unlimited-memory or broad-IQ claim.", "measures": { "direct": "Uncued recall or task accuracy against a predeclared criterion.", "retention": "Delayed recall or performance after a specified interval.", "transfer": "Application to a new problem, example or context not used in practice.", "burden": "Time, fatigue, frustration and interference with sleep or essential work." }, "protocol": [ "Define the material and final use.", "Record an uncued baseline.", "Schedule spaced retrieval with feedback.", "Test after a delay.", "Test one predeclared transfer task.", "Adjust interval or method from misses." ], "anchors": { "1": "Baseline recall or task accuracy is inconsistent without prompts.", "2": "Meets criterion immediately after supported or repeated practice.", "3": "Meets the direct criterion through uncued retrieval on two sessions.", "4": "Retains the gain after the delay and succeeds on the transfer task.", "5": "Retains and transfers across defined contexts and can teach the retrieval-and-feedback method." }, "guardrail": "Protect sleep and health. A memory strategy improves a defined task; it does not create unlimited capacity.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE", "EVD-SPACING", "EVD-DELIBERATE-PRACTICE" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-MOTOR-JUGGLING", "name": "Task-specific motor learning", "claim": "A visible motor sequence can be acquired and measured without claiming broad cognitive enhancement.", "direct": "For a three-ball cascade, use the median successful catches across three sixty-second trials; accessible alternatives include an instrument phrase, knot or assembly sequence, seated hand skill or dumpling fold.", "retention": "Repeat the identical scoring protocol after a declared no-practice interval.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared alternate start, safe object set, phrase, material or closely related sequence.", "guardrail": "Choose a safe accessible task and clear practice area. Do not use sharp, hot, heavy or breakable objects without appropriate competence and supervision.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-MOTOR-JUGGLING", "EVD-DELIBERATE-PRACTICE" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-METACOGNITIVE-CALIBRATION", "familyId": "CAP-LEARNING-META", "name": "Metacognitive Calibration & Error Detection", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Align confidence with actual performance, detect recurring error types and improve correction.", "exclusions": "Not a global self-awareness or character score.", "measures": { "direct": "Confidence–accuracy calibration and error-detection rate on a defined task.", "retention": "Calibration on the same task family after a delay.", "transfer": "Calibration on a related but untrained task.", "burden": "Time, rumination, indecision or confidence suppression." }, "protocol": [ "Make an answer or decision before feedback.", "Record confidence on a defined scale.", "Compare confidence with the result.", "Classify the error and correction.", "Repeat after a delay.", "Test calibration on a related task." ], "anchors": { "1": "Confidence and accuracy are poorly aligned or errors are rarely detected.", "2": "Detects obvious errors after external feedback but calibration remains inconsistent.", "3": "Meets the predeclared calibration or detection criterion on the trained task.", "4": "Retains calibration and detects errors on a related untrained task.", "5": "Maintains calibration across defined contexts and can explain recurring error patterns and corrections." }, "guardrail": "Calibration should improve action, not produce endless self-doubt. Use external standards and stop if review becomes compulsive or paralysing.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-METACOGNITION" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-CONFIDENCE-TAGGED-QUIZZING", "name": "Confidence-tagged quizzing", "claim": "Recording confidence before feedback makes task-specific calibration and recurring error patterns measurable; it is not a general self-awareness score.", "direct": "Answer a predeclared balanced set of at least twenty scorable items before feedback, attach a probability or fixed confidence bin to every answer, and calculate accuracy, calibration gap by bin and a proper score such as the Brier score when probabilities are used.", "retention": "After at least seven days, repeat the same procedure on a new matched item set without the original correction notes visible.", "transfer": "Use the same confidence scale and scoring method on a predeclared related but untrained topic or task format.", "guardrail": "Use low-stakes material and a fixed review window. Do not use the exercise to diagnose a person, repeatedly reopen settled answers or replace qualified review of medical, legal, financial or safety-critical decisions.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-METACOGNITION", "EVD-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-CREATIVE-COGNITION", "familyId": "CAP-LEARNING-META", "name": "Creative Cognition & Insight", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Generate alternatives, select for novelty and usefulness, prototype, test and revise.", "exclusions": "Training does not guarantee exceptional creative achievement or a general genius mode.", "measures": { "direct": "Number and diversity of viable alternatives plus rated novelty and usefulness.", "retention": "Repeat the method after a delay without the original prompts.", "transfer": "Produce and test alternatives in a different problem domain.", "burden": "Time, frustration, sleep loss or unfinished-work accumulation." }, "protocol": [ "Define the problem and usefulness criterion.", "Separate generation from selection.", "Generate genuinely different alternatives.", "Select one using novelty plus usefulness.", "Prototype and test.", "Repeat on a different problem." ], "anchors": { "1": "Produces few distinct alternatives or selects without a criterion.", "2": "Generates several alternatives with prompts or structured support.", "3": "Independently generates, selects and tests an alternative against the criterion.", "4": "Retains the process and transfers it to a different problem domain.", "5": "Produces robust tested alternatives across defined constraints and can facilitate the process for another person." }, "guardrail": "Measure finished tests, not idea volume alone. Protect sleep and limit simultaneous unfinished prototypes.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CREATIVITY-TRAINING" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-CONSTRAINT-SWITCH-PROTOTYPE", "name": "Constraint-switch prototype sprint", "claim": "Separating generation from selection and testing makes the diversity, novelty and usefulness of alternatives observable on a bounded problem; it does not establish a general genius mode.", "direct": "Define one low-risk problem and usefulness rubric, generate at least six alternatives spanning three genuinely different mechanisms, select one only after generation closes, then build a small test. Score distinct mechanisms, independent novelty and usefulness ratings, and whether the prototype met its criterion.", "retention": "After at least seven days, repeat the complete process on a matched problem without the original prompts or alternatives visible.", "transfer": "Apply the same generation-selection-test sequence to a predeclared problem in a different domain and preserve the same rubric structure.", "guardrail": "Time-box generation and cap unfinished prototypes. Do not use the sprint for safety-critical design without qualified review, and stop if it displaces sleep or essential work.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CREATIVITY-TRAINING" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-PROSPECTIVE-MEMORY", "familyId": "CAP-LEARNING-META", "name": "Prospective Memory & External Cues", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Strong", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Capture future intentions and attach them to reliable time- or event-based cues.", "exclusions": "Evidence for reminders does not by itself establish a general capacity-budgeting system.", "measures": { "direct": "Intention completion after the assigned cue.", "retention": "Completion rate across at least two review periods.", "transfer": "Reliable use of the cue method for a different intention type.", "burden": "Alert count, ignored cues, anxiety and open-loop accumulation." }, "protocol": [ "Capture one intention outside your head.", "Attach it to a time or observable event.", "Define the smallest next action.", "Set one reliable cue and fallback.", "Review misses without blame.", "Reduce commitments before adding alerts." ], "anchors": { "1": "Important intentions are often missed or depend on mental rehearsal.", "2": "Completes cued intentions with repeated alerts or external support.", "3": "Meets the completion criterion using one designed cue and fallback.", "4": "Maintains completion across review periods and transfers the method to a different intention type.", "5": "Runs a low-burden reliable cue system and can help another person design one without overload." }, "guardrail": "External memory should reduce cognitive load. Overload, disability or executive limits are design constraints, not moral failures.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-PROSPECTIVE-REMINDERS" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-PROSPECT", "prospective-memory" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-CUE-ANCHORED-DAILY-TASK", "name": "Cue-anchored daily task", "claim": "A future intention linked to one observable event cue and one fallback can be measured by timely completion and reminder burden; missed intentions are design data, not a moral score.", "direct": "Choose one low-stakes daily task for fourteen days, link it to one observable event cue, define a completion window and one fallback, then record cue occurrence, completion within the window, fallback use and ignored-alert count.", "retention": "Continue for a second fourteen-day period after removing any temporary coaching or redundant prompts while keeping the cue and fallback fixed.", "transfer": "Apply the method to a different low-stakes intention type with a different observable cue, predeclaring the same completion and burden measures.", "guardrail": "Do not use this exemplar as the sole safeguard for medication, childcare, driving, emergency, legal or other consequential duties. Reduce commitments before adding alerts, protect private logs and stop if reminders increase anxiety or compulsive checking.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-PROSPECTIVE-REMINDERS" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-FORECASTING", "familyId": "CAP-DECISION-CAUSAL", "name": "Quantitative Intelligence & Forecasting", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Strong", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Resolvable probability estimates, base rates, decomposition, calibration and evidence-based updating.", "exclusions": "A forecast is not certainty, diagnosis or qualified legal, medical or financial advice.", "measures": { "direct": "Brier score, calibration gap or Fermi estimate error.", "retention": "Calibration across a rolling resolved-question window.", "transfer": "Calibration on a new topic with comparable resolution quality.", "burden": "Research time, unresolved-question load and false precision." }, "protocol": [ "Write a resolvable question and date.", "Define Yes, No and Invalid.", "Find a relevant base rate.", "Publish a probability.", "Update only for relevant evidence.", "Resolve and score." ], "anchors": { "1": "Uses vague confidence language or cannot reliably resolve and score forecasts.", "2": "Records probabilities and outcomes with support but calibration is unstable.", "3": "Maintains a resolvable forecast set and meets the predeclared rolling calibration criterion.", "4": "Retains calibration and transfers the process to a new topic.", "5": "Shows robust calibration across defined topics and can teach resolution, base-rate and update discipline." }, "guardrail": "Forecasts inform decisions; they never erase uncertainty or replace qualified advice.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-FORECASTING" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-FORECAST", "forecasting" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-TASK-DURATION", "name": "Task-duration forecasting", "claim": "Repeated estimates can be calibrated against actual task duration; the direction and size of bias must be measured rather than assumed.", "direct": "For at least ten comparable tasks, record the estimate and actual active time, then calculate signed error and absolute percentage or log-ratio error.", "retention": "Repeat the method across a later rolling window without hiding overruns or abandoned tasks.", "transfer": "Predeclare a different task class and test whether an outside-view estimate based on completed work remains calibrated.", "guardrail": "Separate active time from waiting time, keep invalidation rules fixed and never turn a forecast into a promise of certainty.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-TASK-DURATION-FORECAST", "EVD-FORECASTING" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-CAUSAL-EXPERIMENTAL", "familyId": "CAP-DECISION-CAUSAL", "name": "Decision, Causal & Experimental Intelligence", "status": "new", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Variable", "scope": "Causal diagrams, alternative explanations, confounders, expected value, value of information and safe experiment design.", "exclusions": "No general immunity to bias or permission for unsafe self-experimentation.", "measures": { "direct": "Causal-structure error, confounders identified, decision-criterion fit or experiment-validity checklist.", "retention": "Repeat the analysis after a delay without viewing the original answer.", "transfer": "Apply the method to a different decision or causal problem.", "burden": "Decision delay, analysis cost, experiment risk and opportunity cost." }, "protocol": [ "State the decision and objective.", "Draw the assumed causal path.", "List confounders and alternative explanations.", "Estimate value of more information.", "Predeclare outcome, stop rule and interpretation limits.", "Review prediction versus result." ], "anchors": { "1": "Causal claims omit major alternatives or the decision lacks an explicit objective.", "2": "Identifies obvious confounders and criteria with prompts or templates.", "3": "Completes the causal and decision checklist and meets the direct-validity criterion independently.", "4": "Retains the method and applies it successfully to a different decision or experiment.", "5": "Uses the method robustly across defined decisions and can review another analysis while preserving uncertainty and safety." }, "guardrail": "Do not run health, substance, financial, legal or high-risk experiments without appropriate professional oversight. Prefer reversible, low-risk tests.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CAUSAL-TRAINING", "EVD-DEBIASING" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-NOF1-TIME-OF-DAY", "name": "Low-risk N-of-1 time-of-day experiment", "claim": "A randomized or counterbalanced within-person comparison can test whether performance on one safe task differs between two feasible time windows; it does not identify a universal chronotype or prove a medical cause.", "direct": "Predeclare one low-risk repeatable task, one primary outcome, two feasible time windows, exclusion rules and a stop rule. Randomize or counterbalance at least twelve valid sessions while holding task format and scoring constant, then report each condition, missingness, the within-person difference and uncertainty without deleting inconvenient sessions.", "retention": "After at least seven days, independently design and run a shorter confirmatory block with the same primary outcome and fixed interpretation rule.", "transfer": "Apply the design checklist to a different reversible low-risk task while predeclaring a new outcome and likely confounders.", "guardrail": "Never manipulate sleep duration, medication, substances, meals needed for health, driving or hazardous work. Do not infer a diagnosis or reorganise consequential duties from a small personal result; stop for adverse symptoms or material life disruption.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CAUSAL-TRAINING", "EVD-DEBIASING" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-ARGUMENTATION", "familyId": "CAP-COMMUNICATION", "name": "Argumentation & Dialectical Testing", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Falsifiable claims, source–claim fit, counterargument fidelity, crux identification and confidence updating.", "exclusions": "The evidence does not support every form of rhetoric or universal persuasion skill.", "measures": { "direct": "Claim–evidence fit, counterargument fidelity and agreed crux.", "retention": "Repeat evaluation of a new claim after a delay.", "transfer": "Apply the method in a different topic or communication format.", "burden": "Conflict, defensiveness, time and relationship cost." }, "protocol": [ "State one falsifiable claim.", "Separate source, observation and assumption.", "Write the strongest opposing case.", "Name the crux.", "State what changes your mind.", "Update confidence after evidence." ], "anchors": { "1": "Claims, evidence and assumptions are mixed or opposition is caricatured.", "2": "Separates components and improves the counterargument with prompts.", "3": "Produces a faithful argument map and identifies a testable crux independently.", "4": "Retains the method and transfers it to a different topic or format.", "5": "Facilitates rigorous disagreement across defined contexts while preserving truth, consent and relationship safety." }, "guardrail": "Persuasion must not become coercion, deception, harassment or exploitation.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-DIALECTICAL-ESTIMATION" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-ARGUE", "argumentation" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-DECISION-MEMO", "name": "Claim-and-counterargument decision memo", "claim": "A short falsifiable memo can make evidence, assumptions, strongest opposition, cruxes and confidence updates auditable.", "direct": "Use a fixed rubric for source-claim fit, opposing-case fidelity, crux quality and justified confidence updating.", "retention": "Repeat the method after a delay without the original checklist visible.", "transfer": "Apply the same rubric to a different low-stakes topic with new sources.", "guardrail": "Do not use argument skill to harass, coerce or overwhelm. High-stakes medical, legal and financial claims still require qualified expertise.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-DIALECTICAL-ESTIMATION" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-TEACHING-NEGOTIATION", "familyId": "CAP-COMMUNICATION", "name": "Listening, Teaching & Negotiation", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Listening accuracy, explanation, teach-back, negotiation, consent and relationship repair.", "exclusions": "No guarantee of agreement and no permission to manipulate or pressure.", "measures": { "direct": "Listener comprehension, teach-back accuracy, listening reconstruction or negotiated criterion.", "retention": "Learner performance or agreement quality after a delay.", "transfer": "Successful explanation or negotiation with a different person or topic.", "burden": "Time, distress, power imbalance and relationship cost." }, "protocol": [ "Define the shared outcome and consent boundary.", "Listen and reconstruct before responding.", "Explain in the listener's terms.", "Use teach-back or an explicit agreement check.", "Record unresolved differences.", "Review outcome and relationship cost." ], "anchors": { "1": "Understanding or agreement frequently fails and is not checked.", "2": "Uses reconstruction or teach-back with prompts and repairs obvious misunderstandings.", "3": "Meets the comprehension or negotiated-outcome criterion on the defined interaction.", "4": "Retains the process and transfers it to a different person or topic.", "5": "Performs across defined communication constraints and can teach the consent, listening and repair sequence." }, "guardrail": "Account for power differences. Stop if an interaction becomes coercive, unsafe or beyond your competence to mediate.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-COMMUNICATION-TRAINING", "EVD-ASSERTIVENESS" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-TEACH-BACK-DELAYED-LEARNER", "name": "Teach-back with a delayed learner test", "claim": "A learner’s immediate reconstruction and delayed application can test whether one bounded explanation produced usable understanding; fluency or agreement alone is not evidence of learning.", "direct": "With consent, teach one bounded low-stakes concept, then have the learner explain it in their own words and solve one near application without copying the explanation. Score a predeclared accuracy and misconception rubric.", "retention": "After at least seven days without reteaching, have the learner complete a new matched explanation or application and score it with the same rubric.", "transfer": "Use the same consent, reconstruction and delayed-test sequence with a different learner or topic and a new answer key.", "guardrail": "Keep the exercise consensual and account for power, language, disability and prior knowledge. Do not test high-stakes clinical, legal, financial or safety instruction unless a qualified professional owns the content and assessment.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-COMMUNICATION-TRAINING" ], "evidenceQualification": "The current evidence entry supports structured communication training generally; promotion of this exact delayed teach-back exemplar should add a verified source on teach-back or learner retrieval with delayed outcomes." } ] }, { "id": "MOD-TEAM-ORCHESTRATION", "familyId": "CAP-COLLABORATION", "name": "Collective Intelligence & Team Orchestration", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Strong", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Independent estimates, expertise maps, balanced contribution, dissent, closed-loop communication and after-action review.", "exclusions": "Group performance is context dependent and must not be reduced to demographic or personality proxies.", "measures": { "direct": "Estimate accuracy, expertise coverage, closed-loop handoff or decision-memory completeness.", "retention": "Team repeats the operating sequence after a delay.", "transfer": "The sequence improves performance on a different team task.", "burden": "Meeting time, participation imbalance, surveillance risk and dissent cost." }, "protocol": [ "Define the decision and expertise map.", "Collect independent estimates before discussion.", "Aggregate and expose assumptions.", "Invite strongest dissent.", "Close the loop on owner, action and review date.", "Run an after-action review." ], "anchors": { "1": "The team lacks expertise visibility, independent input or reliable decision memory.", "2": "Uses the sequence with facilitation but participation or handoffs remain inconsistent.", "3": "Meets the predeclared coverage, handoff or decision-quality criterion on the defined task.", "4": "Retains the sequence and transfers it to a different team task.", "5": "The team performs robustly across defined tasks and can onboard others without suppressing dissent." }, "guardrail": "Measure behaviour and outcomes, never identity proxies. Team metrics must not become punitive surveillance.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-COLLECTIVE-INTELLIGENCE", "EVD-TEAMWORK-TRAINING", "EVD-SOCIAL-INFLUENCE" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-TEAM", "collective-intelligence" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-INDEPENDENT-ESTIMATES", "name": "Independent estimates before discussion", "claim": "Preserving independent judgments before group discussion can expose useful disagreement and reduce premature convergence.", "direct": "Compare the quality and error of independent-first aggregation with the team's declared baseline, while recording dissent coverage and coordination cost.", "retention": "Repeat the process across at least two later team cycles.", "transfer": "Use the method on a different decision or estimation task with the same ownership rules.", "guardrail": "Protect psychological safety, attribution and the right to dissent. Do not infer an individual's intelligence from the group result.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-COLLECTIVE-INTELLIGENCE", "EVD-SOCIAL-INFLUENCE" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR", "familyId": "CAP-MAKING-OPS", "name": "Making, Repair & Tool Intelligence", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Emerging", "risk": "Variable", "scope": "Low-risk diagnosis, tool selection, maintenance, verified repair and safe escalation.", "exclusions": "Tool-use plasticity does not establish broad repair intelligence or trade competence.", "measures": { "direct": "Correct diagnosis, safe isolation, verified restoration or appropriate escalation.", "retention": "Repeat the diagnostic and safety sequence after a delay.", "transfer": "Diagnose a different low-risk failure using the same principles.", "burden": "Near miss, injury, damage, cost and rework." }, "protocol": [ "Describe failure and stop condition.", "Isolate energy and hazards.", "Inspect and diagnose before replacing parts.", "Choose the least destructive test.", "Repair only within competence.", "Verify, document and schedule maintenance." ], "anchors": { "1": "Diagnosis, isolation or verification is incomplete on the selected low-risk task.", "2": "Completes the task safely with guidance, checklist or supervision.", "3": "Independently meets the diagnosis, isolation and verification criterion within competence.", "4": "Retains the safety sequence and transfers it to a different low-risk failure.", "5": "Performs robustly across defined low-risk systems and can teach the diagnostic sequence while escalating correctly." }, "guardrail": "Electricity, gas, structural systems, vehicles, pressure systems and other high-energy work belong with qualified professionals beyond your training.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-TOOL-PLASTICITY" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-REPAIR", "tool-repair" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-DIM-SUM-PROGRESSION", "name": "Dim-sum fold or culinary technique progression", "claim": "A visible making skill can be improved through repeatable quality criteria, defect review and safe transfer to a related form.", "direct": "For a dumpling fold, score seal integrity, weight consistency, shape consistency, defect rate and safe completion time across a fixed batch.", "retention": "Repeat the same batch and scoring criteria after at least seven days.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared different dough, filling consistency or fold while retaining food-safety and quality criteria.", "guardrail": "Use food-safe ingredients and accessible tools. Knife, heat, allergen and commercial food work require appropriate competence, supervision and local rules.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-DELIBERATE-PRACTICE", "EVD-DEBRIEFING" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-OPERATIONAL-SYSTEMS", "familyId": "CAP-MAKING-OPS", "name": "Operational Systems Design", "status": "continued", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Low", "scope": "Triggers, owners, handoffs, checklists, fallbacks, tabletop tests and recovery learning.", "exclusions": "A checklist cannot manufacture competence or transfer unchanged into every domain.", "measures": { "direct": "Omission rate, handoff completeness, recovery time or failure rate.", "retention": "The process still runs correctly after a defined interval.", "transfer": "Adapt the design pattern to a different low-risk workflow.", "burden": "Maintenance cost, alert fatigue, brittleness and workarounds." }, "protocol": [ "Define trigger and desired outcome.", "Map the smallest reliable sequence.", "Assign owner and handoffs.", "Add a fallback for the likely failure.", "Run a tabletop test.", "Review failures and revise." ], "anchors": { "1": "The process depends on memory or heroics and fails unpredictably.", "2": "A documented sequence works with active prompting or close supervision.", "3": "Meets the defined omission, handoff or recovery criterion in routine use.", "4": "Retains reliability and transfers the design pattern to a different workflow.", "5": "Runs robustly across defined disruptions and can be handed over without hidden knowledge." }, "guardrail": "High-risk systems still require qualified people, current procedures and applicable professional standards.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CHECKLIST-SYSTEMS", "EVD-DEBRIEFING" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-SYSTEMS", "systems-design" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-BACKUP-RESTORE-FIRE-DRILL", "name": "Backup-and-restore fire drill", "claim": "A backup is operationally useful only when a defined artifact can be restored and verified within the declared recovery target; one successful drill does not prove disaster readiness.", "direct": "In a sandbox, choose a non-sensitive test artifact, declare a recovery-time target and verification checks, create the backup, remove only the sandbox working copy, restore it, then record success, recovery time, missing items, checksum or record-count match and whether the artifact opens or runs as expected.", "retention": "Repeat the drill after at least thirty days using the same written procedure and a fresh test artifact, without relying on the original operator’s memory.", "transfer": "Adapt the pattern to a different low-risk data type or workflow and predeclare its own restore checks and recovery target.", "guardrail": "Never delete the sole copy or test destructively on production. Use synthetic or approved data, protect keys and personal information, preserve an independent known-good copy and obtain system-owner approval before touching shared infrastructure.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CHECKLIST-SYSTEMS", "EVD-DEBRIEFING" ], "evidenceQualification": "The current evidence supports checklist implementation and structured debriefing, not a universal backup technology or recovery-time promise." } ] }, { "id": "MOD-HUMAN-AI-COMPLEMENTARITY", "familyId": "CAP-HUMAN-TECH", "name": "Human–AI Complementarity & Reliance Calibration", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Variable", "scope": "Task allocation, verification, provenance, disagreement escalation, accountable override and skill-retention checks.", "exclusions": "Human plus AI is not assumed to beat the better solo baseline.", "measures": { "direct": "Combined quality, time, defect escape, disagreement catch and verification rate.", "retention": "Repeat an unassisted trial after a defined assistance period.", "transfer": "Use the allocation and verification method on a different task.", "burden": "Privacy exposure, verification time, automation bias and skill loss." }, "protocol": [ "Define quality and safety criteria.", "Record a human-only or best-known baseline.", "Assign human, AI and joint work explicitly.", "Verify sources and disagreements.", "Compare combined performance with the best solo baseline.", "Run periodic unassisted retention checks." ], "anchors": { "1": "Uses assistance without a baseline, verification rule or ownership boundary.", "2": "Applies a checklist with support but misses some defects or provenance gaps.", "3": "The combined workflow meets the direct quality and verification criterion without exceeding the best-safe-baseline cost.", "4": "Transfers the workflow to a new task and preserves predeclared unassisted performance.", "5": "Reliably allocates and verifies across defined tasks, catches disagreement and can teach the governance method." }, "guardrail": "Protect confidential data, preserve accountable human ownership and escalate high-stakes disagreement to qualified review.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-HUMAN-AI-META", "EVD-GENAI-PRODUCTIVITY", "EVD-NIST-AI-RMF" ], "legacyIds": [], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-HUMAN-AI-BRIEF", "name": "Human-only versus AI-assisted brief", "claim": "A human-AI workflow is useful only when it beats the better safe baseline on a declared quality-and-cost rubric.", "direct": "Compare human-only, AI-only when safe, and combined outputs for rubric quality, time, defect escape, disagreement catch and verification burden.", "retention": "Repeat an unassisted human check after a delay to detect skill loss.", "transfer": "Apply the allocation and verification method to a different task without reusing confidential material.", "guardrail": "Protect private data, keep accountable human ownership and verify consequential claims against primary or authoritative sources.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-HUMAN-AI-META", "EVD-GENAI-PRODUCTIVITY" ] } ] }, { "id": "MOD-ASSISTIVE-FIT", "familyId": "CAP-HUMAN-TECH", "name": "Assistive Technology & Person–Task Fit", "status": "promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "risk": "Variable", "scope": "Select, trial, adapt and review tools against the intended task, context, burden and lived experience.", "exclusions": "A device or substitution is not successful merely because it is available or technically functional.", "measures": { "direct": "Task completion, accessibility, error, symptom-safe completion and assistance required.", "retention": "Sustained use and benefit at the scheduled review.", "transfer": "Benefit in another predeclared relevant context.", "burden": "Setup, maintenance, fatigue, pain, stigma, privacy, cost and abandonment risk." }, "protocol": [ "Name the intended function.", "Map person, task and environment constraints.", "Trial the lowest-burden safe option.", "Measure benefit and burden.", "Review after real use.", "Keep, modify, replace or abandon without penalty." ], "anchors": { "1": "Current tool or pathway does not reliably support the intended task.", "2": "Completes the task with substantial setup, support or burden.", "3": "Meets the task criterion with acceptable burden in the primary context.", "4": "Sustains benefit and transfers it to another relevant context.", "5": "Maintains robust person–task fit across defined contexts and can document or teach the setup safely." }, "guardrail": "Respect medical restrictions and lived experience. Device trials must include burden and adverse-event review; abandonment is data, not failure.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-WHO-ASSISTIVE", "EVD-HUMAN-CENTRED-DESIGN" ], "legacyIds": [ "CAP-ADAPT", "adaptive-augmentation" ], "exemplars": [ { "id": "EX-TWO-WEEK-ASSISTIVE-TRIAL", "name": "Two-week assistive-technology fit trial", "claim": "A time-bounded real-use trial can compare task benefit with setup, symptom, privacy and abandonment burden; availability or novelty alone does not establish person-task fit.", "direct": "Define one intended function and primary context, record at least three baseline attempts, then trial one safe option for fourteen days. Record task completion, time or error, assistance required, symptom-safe completion, setup time, maintenance, privacy concern and non-use days.", "retention": "At days seven and fourteen, and again at a predeclared later review if the tool is kept, repeat the task measure and record sustained use, adaptation and burden rather than assuming continued benefit.", "transfer": "Test the same option in one predeclared relevant secondary context while preserving the primary safety and burden criteria.", "guardrail": "Respect medical restrictions and lived experience, use qualified fitting or training where required, protect device data and avoid unaffordable lock-in. Pain, fatigue, unsafe performance, privacy harm or abandonment triggers review; discontinuing a poor-fit tool is a valid result.", "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-WHO-ASSISTIVE", "EVD-HUMAN-CENTRED-DESIGN" ] } ] } ], "governance": [ { "id": "GOV-SAFETY", "name": "Safety & Clearance", "rule": "Risk screens, professional boundaries and stop conditions route every protocol before performance.", "measure": "Clearance coverage, stop-rule compliance, adverse events and near misses." }, { "id": "GOV-READINESS", "name": "Readiness & Dose Routing", "rule": "Readiness is a transparent self-report pacing heuristic, not a validated diagnostic or capability score.", "measure": "Dimension coverage, selected pace, planned versus completed dose and symptom response." }, { "id": "GOV-ADAPTATION", "name": "Accessibility & Adaptation", "rule": "Preserve the intended function through an equivalent lower-risk pathway; never penalise an assistive route.", "measure": "Constraint coverage, substitution success, burden and sustainable adherence." }, { "id": "GOV-EVIDENCE", "name": "Evidence Maturity & Claim Scope", "rule": "The practical claim cannot exceed the population, task, outcome, transfer and safety supported by its evidence.", "measure": "Resolved evidence links, claim-limit coverage, review date and downgrade actions." }, { "id": "GOV-DATA", "name": "Data Quality, Privacy & Retirement", "rule": "Store only useful data, label missing coverage, protect exports and retire measures or protocols that do not earn their burden.", "measure": "Data coverage, verification, privacy exposure, burden and keep/adapt/pause/retire decision." } ], "adaptivePaths": [ { "id": "PATH-MOBILITY", "constraint": "Limited mobility", "substitution": "Use seated, supported or clinician-approved variants and score the intended function." }, { "id": "PATH-SENSORY", "constraint": "Sensory loss", "substitution": "Use accessible cues, assistive technology and qualified rehabilitation support." }, { "id": "PATH-NEURO", "constraint": "Neurodivergent needs", "substitution": "Reduce sensory load, externalise sequencing and use predictable, interest-aligned blocks." }, { "id": "PATH-EQUIPMENT", "constraint": "No specialist equipment", "substitution": "Use low-cost, software-free or household equivalents before buying tools." }, { "id": "PATH-TIME", "constraint": "Under 20 minutes a day", "substitution": "Use one active module, one direct measure and one weekly review." }, { "id": "PATH-BUDGET", "constraint": "Limited budget", "substitution": "Prioritise free fundamentals, public resources, repair, borrowing and low-burden trials." }, { "id": "PATH-CARE", "constraint": "Caregiving or unpredictable schedule", "substitution": "Use interruptible sessions, rolling weekly targets and recovery-aware rescheduling." }, { "id": "PATH-FATIGUE", "constraint": "Pain or fluctuating fatigue", "substitution": "Use pacing and stop rules; replace intensity with tolerable consistency and qualified guidance." } ], "evidenceLedger": [ { "id": "EVD-FORECASTING", "title": "Psychological Strategies for Winning a Geopolitical Forecasting Tournament", "source": "Psychological Science", "year": 2014, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Training, teaming and tracking improved probabilistic forecasting in a large tournament.", "limits": "Geopolitical questions and motivated volunteers; transfer requires measurement.", "url": "https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797614524255" }, { "id": "EVD-ECHOLOCATION", "title": "Human click-based echolocation: Effects of blindness and age, and real-life implications in a 10-week training program", "source": "PLOS ONE", "year": 2021, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Blind and sighted adults improved on trained and novel laboratory echolocation tasks.", "limits": "Small samples and substantial training; not a substitute for mobility instruction.", "url": "https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252330" }, { "id": "EVD-PERCEPTUAL-LEARNING", "title": "Perceptual learning", "source": "Current Biology", "year": 2010, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Experience can improve discrimination on defined perceptual tasks.", "limits": "Learning is often stimulus- and task-specific.", "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3821996/" }, { "id": "EVD-OLFACTORY-TRAINING", "title": "Effects of olfactory training: a meta-analysis", "source": "Rhinology", "year": 2017, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Olfactory training can improve smell performance, particularly in dysfunction and rehabilitation contexts.", "limits": "Population and outcome specificity limits broad enhancement claims in healthy adults.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28040824/" }, { "id": "EVD-SPATIAL-TRAINING", "title": "The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies", "source": "Psychological Bulletin", "year": 2013, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Across 217 studies, spatial skills improved with training and transferred to other spatial tasks.", "limits": "Does not establish broad intelligence improvement or equal transfer to real-world navigation.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22663761/" }, { "id": "EVD-SPATIAL-ASSESSMENT", "title": "How Can We Best Assess Spatial Skills? Practical and Conceptual Challenges", "source": "Journal of Intelligence", "year": 2024, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Spatial skill components can be assessed with distinct performance tasks.", "limits": "Task selection determines what is measured; one task is not a complete spatial profile.", "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10816932/" }, { "id": "EVD-PROPRIOCEPTION", "title": "The Effectiveness of Proprioceptive Training for Improving Motor Performance and Motor Dysfunction: A Systematic Review", "source": "Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences", "year": 2022, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Active movement and balance-oriented proprioceptive training can improve defined proprioceptive and motor outcomes.", "limits": "Substantial heterogeneity and limited retention evidence.", "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9397687/" }, { "id": "EVD-BALANCE-PERTURBATION", "title": "Does perturbation-based balance training prevent falls? Systematic review and meta-analysis of preliminary randomized controlled trials", "source": "Physical Therapy", "year": 2015, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Perturbation-based balance training reduced faller risk and fall rate in studied older and Parkinsonian populations.", "limits": "Requires appropriate supervision; results are population- and protocol-specific.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25524873/" }, { "id": "EVD-CROSS-EDUCATION", "title": "Cross-education of muscular strength following unilateral resistance training: a meta-analysis", "source": "European Journal of Applied Physiology", "year": 2017, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Unilateral training increased strength in the untrained contralateral limb on average.", "limits": "Studies had substantial risk of bias; it is an adjunct rather than replacement for rehabilitation.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28936703/" }, { "id": "EVD-RETRIEVAL-PRACTICE", "title": "Rethinking the Use of Tests: A Meta-Analysis of Practice Testing", "source": "Review of Educational Research", "year": 2017, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Retrieval practice improves learning across many educational comparisons.", "limits": "Effect varies by feedback, material, delay and test match.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316689306" }, { "id": "EVD-SPACING", "title": "Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis", "source": "Psychological Bulletin", "year": 2006, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Spacing study episodes improves delayed retention across a large evidence base.", "limits": "Optimal interval depends on desired retention delay and material.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16719566/" }, { "id": "EVD-DELIBERATE-PRACTICE", "title": "Deliberate practice and performance in music, games, sports, education, and professions: a meta-analysis", "source": "Psychological Science", "year": 2014, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Deliberate practice explains a meaningful but variable portion of performance differences.", "limits": "Contribution differs substantially by domain and does not explain all expertise.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24986855/" }, { "id": "EVD-METACOGNITION", "title": "Meta-analysis of Interventions for Monitoring Accuracy in Problem Solving", "source": "Educational Psychology Review", "year": 2024, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Interventions produce a small reliable improvement in task-specific monitoring accuracy.", "limits": "External standards and whole-task feedback matter; confidence prompts alone may fail.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-024-09936-4" }, { "id": "EVD-CREATIVITY-TRAINING", "title": "The impact of creativity training on creative performance: A meta-analytic review and critical evaluation of 5 decades of creativity training studies", "source": "Psychological Bulletin", "year": 2024, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Creativity training produces small-to-moderate improvements after adjustment for publication bias.", "limits": "Methodological weaknesses and outcome variation limit claims about real-world creative achievement.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000432" }, { "id": "EVD-PROSPECTIVE-REMINDERS", "title": "Strategic use of reminders: Influence of both domain-general and task-specific metacognitive confidence, independent of objective memory ability", "source": "Consciousness and Cognition", "year": 2015, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "People can use external reminders strategically to support delayed intentions.", "limits": "Does not establish a general capacity-budgeting or work-in-progress system.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25666463/" }, { "id": "EVD-CAUSAL-TRAINING", "title": "Causal theory error in college students' understanding of science studies", "source": "Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications", "year": 2022, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "A targeted intervention reduced defined causal-reasoning errors with short follow-up.", "limits": "Narrow task and population; broad real-world transfer is not established.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35022946/" }, { "id": "EVD-DEBIASING", "title": "Debiasing Decisions: Improved Decision Making With a Single Training Intervention", "source": "Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences", "year": 2015, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Instructional interventions reduced several targeted decision biases.", "limits": "Not all biases, contexts or long-term transfer are covered.", "url": "https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2372732215600886" }, { "id": "EVD-DIALECTICAL-ESTIMATION", "title": "The Wisdom of Many in One Mind: Improving Individual Judgments With Dialectical Bootstrapping", "source": "Psychological Science", "year": 2009, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Generating a second dialectically derived estimate modestly improved aggregated judgement.", "limits": "A narrow estimation result does not support every component of rhetoric or debate.", "url": "https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02271.x" }, { "id": "EVD-COMMUNICATION-TRAINING", "title": "Communication skills training for healthcare professionals working with people who have cancer", "source": "Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews", "year": 2013, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Training improved some information-gathering and supportive communication behaviours.", "limits": "Context-specific evidence; patient and long-term outcomes vary.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23543521/" }, { "id": "EVD-ASSERTIVENESS", "title": "The effectiveness of assertiveness communication training programs for healthcare professionals and students: A systematic review", "source": "International Journal of Nursing Studies", "year": 2017, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Structured assertiveness training can improve defined communication outcomes.", "limits": "Population and setting specificity; not a general negotiation guarantee.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28964979/" }, { "id": "EVD-COLLECTIVE-INTELLIGENCE", "title": "Quantifying collective intelligence in human groups", "source": "PNAS", "year": 2021, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "A robust group-level factor predicted performance across a diverse task battery.", "limits": "Performance remains context-dependent and should not become an individual trait score.", "url": "https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2005737118" }, { "id": "EVD-TEAMWORK-TRAINING", "title": "The Effectiveness of Teamwork Training on Teamwork Behaviors and Team Performance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Controlled Interventions", "source": "PLOS ONE", "year": 2017, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Across 72 interventions, teamwork training improved team behaviour and performance.", "limits": "Intervention format and context matter; didactic-only teaching was less useful.", "url": "https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0169604" }, { "id": "EVD-SOCIAL-INFLUENCE", "title": "How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect", "source": "PNAS", "year": 2011, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Social influence can reduce opinion diversity and undermine aggregate accuracy.", "limits": "Experimental setting; team design must balance independence with information sharing.", "url": "https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1008636108" }, { "id": "EVD-TOOL-PLASTICITY", "title": "Tool-Use Training Induces Changes of the Body Schema in the Limb Without Using Tool", "source": "Frontiers in Human Neuroscience", "year": 2019, "grade": "Emerging", "claim": "Short tool-use training altered task-dependent body-representation measures.", "limits": "Does not support broad repair-intelligence or tool-embodiment claims.", "url": "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/human-neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00454/full" }, { "id": "EVD-CHECKLIST-SYSTEMS", "title": "A Surgical Safety Checklist to Reduce Morbidity and Mortality in a Global Population", "source": "New England Journal of Medicine", "year": 2009, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "A structured checklist implementation was associated with improved outcomes across hospitals.", "limits": "Observational implementation and high-specificity context; transfer requires local adaptation.", "url": "https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa0810119" }, { "id": "EVD-DEBRIEFING", "title": "Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis", "source": "Human Factors", "year": 2013, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Properly conducted debriefs can improve individual and team performance.", "limits": "Design, facilitation and task context affect benefit.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23516804/" }, { "id": "EVD-HUMAN-AI-META", "title": "When combinations of humans and AI are useful: A systematic review and meta-analysis", "source": "Nature Human Behaviour", "year": 2024, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Across 106 experiments, human–AI combinations did not automatically outperform the better solo agent; task type moderated results.", "limits": "Supports baseline comparison and task allocation, not a universal training protocol.", "url": "https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-024-02024-1" }, { "id": "EVD-GENAI-PRODUCTIVITY", "title": "Generative AI at Work", "source": "Quarterly Journal of Economics", "year": 2025, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Staggered deployment of generative-AI assistance improved customer-support productivity on average.", "limits": "One workplace and task family; quality and long-term skill effects require monitoring.", "url": "https://academic.oup.com/qje/article/140/2/889/7990658" }, { "id": "EVD-NIST-AI-RMF", "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)", "source": "NIST", "year": 2023, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Provides a structured vocabulary for validity, safety, resilience, transparency, privacy and bias risk.", "limits": "A governance framework is not evidence that a particular AI workflow improves performance.", "url": "https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework" }, { "id": "EVD-WHO-ASSISTIVE", "title": "Global report on assistive technology", "source": "WHO and UNICEF", "year": 2022, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Assistive outcomes depend on access, appropriate selection, support and person–environment fit.", "limits": "Global guidance does not prescribe an individual device or substitution.", "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451" }, { "id": "EVD-HUMAN-CENTRED-DESIGN", "title": "ISO 9241-210:2019 — Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems", "source": "ISO", "year": 2019, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Human-centred design requires understanding users, tasks, environments and iterative evaluation.", "limits": "A design standard is not a clinical efficacy claim.", "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html" }, { "id": "EVD-WORKING-MEMORY-LIMIT", "title": "Working Memory Training Does Not Improve Performance on Measures of Intelligence or Other Measures of “Far Transfer”: Evidence From a Meta-Analytic Review", "source": "Perspectives on Psychological Science", "year": 2016, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Working-memory training improves practised tasks but convincing broad far transfer is absent.", "limits": "Does not deny task-specific learning.", "url": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4968033/" }, { "id": "EVD-SPEED-READING-LIMIT", "title": "So Much to Read, So Little Time: How Do We Read, and Can Speed Reading Help?", "source": "Psychological Science in the Public Interest", "year": 2016, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Reading speed and comprehension trade off at extreme rates.", "limits": "Skimming can still serve specific purposes.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100615623267" }, { "id": "EVD-MOTOR-JUGGLING", "title": "Learning juggling by gradually increasing difficulty vs. learning the complete skill results in different learning patterns", "source": "Frontiers in Psychology", "year": 2023, "grade": "Emerging", "claim": "A small randomised study demonstrated measurable acquisition of a three-ball cascade using video-confirmed successful catches.", "limits": "It did not establish delayed retention, far transfer or general cognitive enhancement.", "url": "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1284053/full" }, { "id": "EVD-TASK-DURATION-FORECAST", "title": "Exploring the “planning fallacy”: Why people underestimate their task completion times", "source": "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology", "year": 1994, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Across several studies, task-duration predictions were often optimistic; explicitly connecting relevant past experience improved estimates in one experiment.", "limits": "Bias direction and size vary by person and task, so Titan requires repeated personal calibration rather than assuming underestimation.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366" }, { "id": "EVD-ABSOLUTE-PITCH-ADULT", "title": "Is it impossible to acquire absolute pitch in adulthood?", "source": "Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics", "year": 2020, "grade": "Emerging", "claim": "Intensive training improved adult pitch naming; a minority reached high accuracy across all twelve pitch classes and some gains persisted one to three months.", "limits": "Success varied substantially, samples were modest and broad generalisation across timbres and long durations remains incomplete.", "url": "https://link.springer.com/article/10.3758/s13414-019-01869-3" }, { "id": "EVD-HAZARD-PERCEPTION-VALIDATION-2010", "title": "The development and validation of two complementary measures of drivers’ hazard perception ability", "source": "Accident Analysis & Prevention", "year": 2010, "publicationDate": "2010-02-24", "issueDate": "2010-07", "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "The video Hazard Perception Test showed expected novice–experienced differences and correlations with pre-existing hazard-perception measures, supporting validity across the studied age groups.", "limits": "Driving-specific screen test; not the DVSA licensing instrument and not proof of real-world driving competence.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2010.01.017", "sourceNote": "First online publication was 24 February 2010; volume 42, issue 4, pages 1232–1239 is dated July 2010." }, { "id": "EVD-HAZARD-PERCEPTION-TRAINING-2013", "title": "Even highly experienced drivers benefit from a brief hazard perception training intervention", "source": "Accident Analysis & Prevention", "year": 2013, "publicationDate": "2013-01-09", "issueDate": "2013-03", "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "A 20-minute video-based intervention improved experienced drivers' hazard-perception test performance, with the improvement still evident after at least one week.", "limits": "Narrow test-performance outcome in experienced drivers; no demonstrated crash reduction or unrestricted transfer to live driving.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2012.12.014", "sourceNote": "First online publication was 9 January 2013; volume 52, pages 100–110 is dated March 2013." } ], "researchObservatory": [ { "id": "OBS-MAGNETORECEPTION", "name": "Human magnetoreception", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "Controlled work reports neural responses to geomagnetic rotation.", "notEstablished": "A conscious, useful and generally trainable human compass.", "promotionCriteria": "Independent behavioural replication, conscious utility, safe training and real-world transfer.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.eneuro.org/content/6/2/ENEURO.0483-18.2019" }, { "id": "OBS-PILOERECTION", "name": "Voluntary piloerection", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "A rare voluntary trait has been described in self-selected participants.", "notEstablished": "A reliable general training method or meaningful capability outcome.", "promotionCriteria": "Prospective training evidence and a useful objective outcome.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2018.00780/full" }, { "id": "OBS-TETRACHROMACY", "name": "Rare tetrachromatic discrimination", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "Rare individuals may demonstrate additional colour discrimination.", "notEstablished": "Broad trainability or a fourth functional colour dimension in most carriers.", "promotionCriteria": "Replicable functional benefit and a non-invasive training pathway.", "evidenceUrl": "https://jov.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2191517" }, { "id": "OBS-LUCID-DREAM", "name": "Lucid-dream interaction", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "Two-way experimental communication during lucid dreams has been demonstrated.", "notEstablished": "A reliable safe induction method for general self-training.", "promotionCriteria": "Reliable induction without sleep loss or adverse effects plus useful transfer.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(21)00059-2" }, { "id": "OBS-SYNAESTHESIA", "name": "Trained synaesthesia-like associations", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "Training can produce synaesthesia-like behavioural experiences.", "notEstablished": "Broad functional enhancement or durable acquired synaesthesia.", "promotionCriteria": "Replicable durable benefit beyond trained associations.", "evidenceUrl": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4235407/" }, { "id": "OBS-SUPER-RECOGNITION", "name": "Super-recognition", "status": "Trait / screening only", "whatIsKnown": "Exceptional face-recognition performance is a measurable and relatively stable trait.", "notEstablished": "A reliable method that trains the general population to super-recogniser level.", "promotionCriteria": "Randomised training with durable far transfer.", "evidenceUrl": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3904192/" }, { "id": "OBS-PUPIL-CONTROL", "name": "Voluntary pupil control", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "A rare single-case report describes direct voluntary control.", "notEstablished": "Generalisability, trainability or useful application.", "promotionCriteria": "Independent multi-person replication and safe functional value.", "evidenceUrl": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34391820/" }, { "id": "OBS-NOVEL-COLOUR", "name": "Technology-mediated novel colour experience", "status": "Laboratory only", "whatIsKnown": "Specialised optical or photoreceptor-targeted systems can extend colour experiences in controlled settings.", "notEstablished": "A portable consumer capability or durable biological enhancement.", "promotionCriteria": "Independent replication, accessible equipment and safety validation.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adu1052" }, { "id": "OBS-SUPERNUMERARY-LIMBS", "name": "Supernumerary robotic limbs and BCIs", "status": "Research / regulated technology", "whatIsKnown": "Small studies demonstrate learning and embodiment of extra virtual or robotic effectors.", "notEstablished": "General safe everyday augmentation or low-burden control.", "promotionCriteria": "Larger trials, durable benefit, privacy and cognitive-load safeguards.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-28725-7" }, { "id": "OBS-NEUROSTIMULATION", "name": "Consumer neurostimulation for cognitive enhancement", "status": "Research / clinical only", "whatIsKnown": "Effects vary by protocol, population and outcome.", "notEstablished": "Reliable general cognitive enhancement from DIY consumer use.", "promotionCriteria": "Replicated clinically governed benefit with long-term safety.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-30127-z" }, { "id": "OBS-AUTONOMIC-IMMUNE", "name": "Voluntary autonomic or immune modulation", "status": "Research / clinician gate", "whatIsKnown": "Small controlled studies report physiological changes after intensive breathing, meditation and cold training.", "notEstablished": "A safe general self-prescription or broad health benefit.", "promotionCriteria": "Larger replication, component isolation, adverse-event data and safe clinical pathway.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1322174111" }, { "id": "OBS-INTEROCEPTIVE-TRAINABILITY", "name": "Trainability and valid measurement of cardiac interoception", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "A small randomised biofeedback study reported a short-term first-session change, while modern work shows that common heartbeat-counting scores are strongly contaminated by beliefs and estimation strategies.", "notEstablished": "A durable, objectively measured general improvement in interoceptive accuracy or downstream emotion, decision or health outcomes.", "promotionCriteria": "Preregistered controlled replication using validated multi-method measures, delayed retention, functional transfer and appropriate clinical safety.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/neuroscience/articles/10.3389/fnins.2022.838055/full" }, { "id": "OBS-IMAGERY-MODULATION", "name": "Voluntary imagery and mental-simulation modulation", "status": "Research only", "whatIsKnown": "Preliminary work reports self-rated multisensory imagery change in some low-imagery adults, and behavioural paradigms can study imagery without assuming one universal imagery style.", "notEstablished": "Objective, durable restoration of sensory visual imagery in congenital aphantasia or a generally effective training protocol.", "promotionCriteria": "Controlled replication with self-report plus behavioural or physiological outcomes, delayed retention, functional transfer and neuroaffirming person-task alternatives.", "evidenceUrl": "https://doi.org/10.1080/10413200.2024.2337019" }, { "id": "OBS-WEARABLE-SENSORY-AUGMENTATION", "name": "Wearable sensory augmentation and technology-mediated directional cues", "status": "Research / technology-mediated", "whatIsKnown": "Extended, device-specific training with a vibrotactile north cue has improved cardinal-direction and survey-knowledge performance in controlled studies; route and wayfinding effects were smaller.", "notEstablished": "Unaided durable retention, broad real-world transfer, general accessibility, long-term safety or a biological human magnetoreceptive sense.", "promotionCriteria": "Independent preregistered replication, device-off delayed retention, safe real-world transfer, accessibility and burden testing, adverse-event monitoring and proof that the cue does not replace established mobility or navigation safety aids.", "evidenceUrl": "https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3425/13/5/720" } ], "explicitExclusions": [ "Generic brain games raise IQ or provide broad far transfer. Nearest honest home: task-specific retention and predeclared transfer in Learning, Memory & Skill Transfer (MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER).", "Extreme speed reading preserves full comprehension. Nearest honest home: comprehension-controlled reading practice in Learning, Memory & Skill Transfer (MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER).", "Microexpressions provide reliable lie detection. Nearest honest home: source and claim verification in the v28 Information Verification candidate, with Argumentation & Dialectical Testing (MOD-ARGUMENTATION) as the current operational route.", "Photographic memory can be broadly trained. Nearest honest home: mnemonics, retrieval, retention and honest transfer testing in Learning, Memory & Skill Transfer (MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER).", "Meditation is a risk-free universal cognitive enhancer. Nearest honest home: a declared task outcome under the v28 Stress Recovery candidate, with clinical symptoms routed to qualified care.", "DIY neurostimulation is a validated general enhancement route. Nearest honest home: the unscored Consumer Neurostimulation Observatory record (OBS-NEUROSTIMULATION).", "Cold, hypoxia, fasting, pain or breath-hold tolerance demonstrates superior character. Nearest honest home: clinician-approved functional work in Sensorimotor Intelligence & Fall Resilience (MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE), never a toughness score.", "Polyphasic sleep schedules, sleep compression or deliberate sleep restriction as a performance superpower. Nearest honest home: the unscored Sleep Regularity & Recovery candidate (MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY), which preserves adequate sleep opportunity and routes clinical sleep concerns to professionals." ], "migration": { "fromSchema": "26.0", "toSchema": "27.3", "policy": "Preserve every v26 rating and every v27.0-v27.2 Cockpit latest-only module record in the legacy module-assessment provenance surface. Do not synthesize an assessmentHistory event, declaration, digest, maintenance state, review window, criterion/protocol version, safety event, agreement result or verification mode. New append-only history begins only with a valid locked declaration and exact ID+digest linkage.", "idMap": { "CAP-FORECAST": "MOD-FORECASTING", "forecasting": "MOD-FORECASTING", "CAP-SENSORY": "MOD-SENSORY-DISCRIMINATION", "sensory-extension": "MOD-SENSORY-DISCRIMINATION", "CAP-TEAM": "MOD-TEAM-ORCHESTRATION", "collective-intelligence": "MOD-TEAM-ORCHESTRATION", "CAP-REPAIR": "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR", "tool-repair": "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR", "CAP-SYSTEMS": "MOD-OPERATIONAL-SYSTEMS", "systems-design": "MOD-OPERATIONAL-SYSTEMS", "CAP-ARGUE": "MOD-ARGUMENTATION", "argumentation": "MOD-ARGUMENTATION", "CAP-PROSPECT": "MOD-PROSPECTIVE-MEMORY", "prospective-memory": "MOD-PROSPECTIVE-MEMORY", "CAP-ADAPT": "GOV-ADAPTATION", "adaptive-augmentation": "GOV-ADAPTATION" }, "nonEquivalentPolicy": "Legacy levels are displayed for provenance but remain unassessed under v27 until a module-specific direct result is recorded." }, "verificationStandard": { "field": "evidenceMode", "modes": [ "Self-report", "Self-recorded", "Instrumented", "Witnessed", "Independently assessed" ], "nullMeaning": "Not recorded; never infer a verification mode from support, prose, level or historical data.", "levelRules": { "3": "Requires a direct result and at least Self-recorded evidence.", "4": "Requires direct, delayed-retention and predeclared-transfer results and at least Self-recorded evidence; a module may require more.", "5": "Defaults to Independently assessed. Instrumented or Witnessed is allowed only through explicit module metadata; Self-report and Self-recorded never qualify.", "1-2": "Self-report may be used only where the module anchor permits awareness or supported practice." }, "aggregationRule": "For mixed methods, record the least independently verifiable mode that applies to every result required for the selected level.", "truthBoundary": "Evidence mode records how a result was verified. It is not a truth score and never replaces the task, criterion, provenance, safety or burden record." }, "lifecycleStandard": { "levelBoundary": "L1-L5 remains the performance scale. Lifecycle is displayed beside the level and never changes the Core Score or creates L6.", "assessmentKinds": [ "initial", "progression", "maintenance", "recovery" ], "displayStates": [ "current", "maintained", "due", "historical", "not-met" ], "appendOnlyRule": "Every assessment is an immutable historical event. Corrections or revalidation create a linked successor; they do not overwrite the prior result.", "maintenanceRule": "Maintained may be derived only when an in-window retest links to a valid prior assessment, uses the exact same target level, criterion version and protocol version, preserves declared material conditions, support and evidence mode, and still meets the criterion. A changed criterion or protocol starts a new assessment context and is not maintenance.", "currentnessRule": "Each result records assessedAt and reviewDueAt or validUntil. Overdue evidence becomes historical or review due; absence of a retest is never labelled maintained.", "recoveryRule": "Recovery describes a later criterion-met assessment after a criterion-not-met event. It does not erase the interruption or imply medical recovery.", "comparabilityFields": [ "moduleId", "targetLevel", "protocolVersion", "criterionVersion", "conditions", "support", "evidenceMode" ] }, "declarationStandard": { "purpose": "Bind criteria and tests before observation without claiming that a local timestamp proves external pre-registration.", "requiredFields": [ "id", "moduleId", "revision", "targetLevel", "task", "conditions", "baselinePlan", "directCriterion", "retentionPlan", "transferPlan", "evidencePlan", "burdenPlan", "stopRule", "protocolVersion", "criterionVersion", "reviewDueDays", "historicalAfterDays", "createdAt", "lockedAt", "supersedesDeclarationId", "canonicalization", "digestAlgorithm" ], "digestProfile": "TITAN-CANONICAL-JSON-1: the requiredFields above, including canonicalization=RFC8785 and digestAlgorithm=SHA-256, are serialized as RFC 8785 canonical I-JSON and hashed as UTF-8 bytes; the digest is encoded as exactly 64 lowercase hexadecimal characters and is not itself part of the hashed object.", "lockRule": "A locked declaration is append-only. A change creates a new declaration with supersedesDeclarationId and keeps the prior declaration and digest visible.", "resultLinkageRule": "Every assessment result created under a declaration references its declarationId and digest. An unlinked or post-hoc result is labelled undeclared and cannot satisfy a predeclaration gate.", "timeBoundary": "lockedAt is a device-reported timestamp unless accompanied by a trusted signed or externally anchored receipt. A local timestamp plus a recomputable local hash does not prove intention before observation.", "signatureBoundary": "A signed declaration receipt can prove key-and-bytes integrity and, with an approved time authority, receipt time. It does not prove identity, correct observation, truth or capability.", "externalReceiptStatus": "draft-disabled-pending-key-custody-authority-privacy-revocation-and-time-service-decisions" }, "rubricReliabilityStandard": { "appliesWhen": "A subjective human-coded rating materially determines an L4 or L5 claim, or a module or exemplar explicitly requires independent rubric scoring.", "waiver": "Not required where a fixed answer key, calibrated instrument or externally governed assessment determines the claimed result without subjective coding.", "protocol": [ "Freeze the rubric, examples, rater eligibility, agreement metric, threshold and disagreement response before ratings begin.", "Have at least two eligible raters score independently without seeing the other rating.", "Preserve every pre-adjudication score and report raw agreement plus the predeclared statistic.", "Use weighted kappa for ordinal categories, an appropriate intraclass correlation for continuous scores, or Krippendorff's alpha when multiple raters or missing ratings require it.", "If the threshold is not met, retrain or clarify the rubric and collect a new independently rated set; never silently average disagreement away." ], "interpretationBoundary": "Agreement does not establish rubric validity, truth or general transfer. It establishes only that the declared coding rule was applied consistently enough for the claimed use." }, "safetyReviewStandard": { "purpose": "Make repeated burden, adverse events, near misses and stop-rule actions visible across modules without diagnosing their cause.", "eventFields": [ "id", "moduleId", "sourceType", "sourceId", "previousSafetyEventId", "occurredAt", "category", "impact", "action", "status", "burden", "details" ], "sourceTypeValues": [ "assessment", "capability-session", "manual" ], "categoryValues": [ "Sleep disruption", "Pain or symptom change", "Fatigue or recovery", "Dizziness or balance", "Glucose or metabolic disruption", "Distress or anxiety", "Sensory overload", "Injury or near miss", "Privacy or data exposure", "Other" ], "impactValues": [ "Observed", "Affected session", "Stopped session", "Emergency response" ], "actionValues": [ "Continue with monitoring", "Adapt", "Pause", "Seek professional review", "Emergency response" ], "statusValues": [ "Open", "Monitoring", "Resolved" ], "sourceLinkageRule": "assessment and capability-session events require a valid sourceId for an existing record of that type; manual events require sourceId=null. Malformed or invented links are rejected, not defaulted.", "statusLinkageRule": "A later status change is a new manual event with sourceId=null and previousSafetyEventId set to an existing current chain head. It must preserve moduleId and category, occur no earlier than its predecessor, and change status. Missing predecessors, cycles, forks, stale-head links and post-hoc edits are rejected rather than repaired.", "historyRule": "Safety events are append-only. The initial event has previousSafetyEventId=null and cannot begin as Resolved. Monitoring, resolution or reopening is appended as a structured linked successor; the earlier status and event record are never edited or deleted.", "aggregationRule": "The review surface may show recurrence, unresolved chains and burden by module or category. Only each valid chain head contributes to the open/monitoring count, so a resolved predecessor is not left counted open. The review must remain descriptive, avoid causal or diagnostic inference, and list Stopped session and Emergency response records individually even after a linked resolution rather than concealing them inside an average.", "privacyRule": "Store the least sensitive description needed for action. Professional handoffs are selective, consent-driven exports rather than automatic disclosure." } }