{ "schemaVersion": "28.0-candidate.4", "documentType": "titan-v28-candidate-registry", "status": "candidate-not-promoted", "prepared": "2026-07-29", "basedOn": { "operationalRegistry": "titan_capabilities_v27.json", "operationalSchemaVersion": "27.3", "cockpitSchemaVersion": "titan-cockpit/27.2.0", "engineVersion": "1.5.0" }, "candidatePolicy": { "scored": false, "availableForAssessment": false, "promotionRequired": true, "claimRule": "No capability claim may exceed the population, task, outcome, retention, transfer and safety supported by its evidence.", "evidenceRule": "Ledger entries support narrow design claims only. Candidate status remains until module-level acceptance tests and governance review pass.", "noGlobalScore": true }, "frozenCoreContract": { "preserved": true, "coreScoreVersion": "25.0", "coreCalculationContract": "1.2", "coreDomainCount": 24, "equalLayerWeighting": true, "candidateEffectOnCore": "none", "policy": "These modules are versioned sidecars. They do not alter the frozen Core Score, its 24 domains, calculation contract 1.2, equal layer weighting, Bridge rules 1.3 or any historical result.", "bridgeRulesVersion": "1.3" }, "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." }, "counts": { "familiesIfPromoted": 8, "operationalModules": 16, "candidateModules": 7, "modulesIfPromoted": 23, "governanceControls": 5, "evidenceEntries": 67, "observatoryEntries": 14 }, "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", "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY" ], "status": "operational-with-candidates", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-SENSORY-DISCRIMINATION", "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION", "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE" ], "candidateModuleIds": [ "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY" ] }, { "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" ], "status": "operational", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER", "MOD-METACOGNITIVE-CALIBRATION", "MOD-CREATIVE-COGNITION", "MOD-PROSPECTIVE-MEMORY" ], "candidateModuleIds": [] }, { "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" ], "status": "operational", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-FORECASTING", "MOD-CAUSAL-EXPERIMENTAL" ], "candidateModuleIds": [] }, { "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", "MOD-INFORMATION-VERIFICATION" ], "status": "operational-with-candidates", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-ARGUMENTATION", "MOD-TEACHING-NEGOTIATION" ], "candidateModuleIds": [ "MOD-INFORMATION-VERIFICATION" ] }, { "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" ], "status": "operational", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-TEAM-ORCHESTRATION" ], "candidateModuleIds": [] }, { "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", "MOD-FIRST-AID-READINESS" ], "status": "operational-with-candidates", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR", "MOD-OPERATIONAL-SYSTEMS" ], "candidateModuleIds": [ "MOD-FIRST-AID-READINESS" ] }, { "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" ], "status": "operational", "operationalModuleIds": [ "MOD-HUMAN-AI-COMPLEMENTARITY", "MOD-ASSISTIVE-FIT" ], "candidateModuleIds": [] }, { "id": "CAP-SELF-REGULATION", "name": "Self-Regulation & Sustainable Performance", "purpose": "Direct attention, recover functional performance after manageable stress and convert intentions into sustainable action under declared conditions.", "exclusions": "No diagnosis or treatment of ADHD, anxiety, trauma, compulsive behaviour, addiction, sleep disorder or any other clinical condition; no promise of universal attention, resilience, productivity or willpower enhancement.", "status": "candidate", "operationalModuleIds": [], "candidateModuleIds": [ "MOD-FOCUS-INTERRUPTION", "MOD-ADHERENCE-HABIT", "MOD-STRESS-RECOVERY", "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY" ], "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FOCUS-INTERRUPTION", "MOD-ADHERENCE-HABIT", "MOD-STRESS-RECOVERY", "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY" ] } ], "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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." } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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." } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "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" ] } ], "registryStatus": "operational", "scoreable": true, "availableForAssessment": true }, { "id": "MOD-FOCUS-INTERRUPTION", "familyId": "CAP-SELF-REGULATION", "name": "Focus & Interruption Management", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Task-switch and interruption costs are well demonstrated, and cueing can improve experimental task resumption. Evidence does not establish a general attention enhancement or an ADHD treatment.", "risk": "Low with safety-critical exclusions", "scope": "Task-level control of avoidable interruptions, deliberate switching and resumption on one declared real-work task under recorded conditions.", "exclusions": "No general attention, intelligence, productivity or ADHD-treatment claim. Deep-work duration alone is not evidence of quality. Safety-critical monitoring, caregiving, driving and emergency-response work are excluded from notification blocking.", "measures": { "direct": "Predeclare one primary task measure: median resumption lag from interruption end to first correct primary-task action; matched-block task-switch cost in time and errors; or protected-session completion rate with an objective task-quality floor. Record at least three comparable baseline and three comparison sessions.", "retention": "Repeat the same task and interruption script without live coaching after at least 7 days; use the original primary measure and quality floor.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared second real-work task or a different interruption source of comparable risk and difficulty; preserve the task-quality floor.", "burden": "Minutes spent configuring the system, fatigue, frustration, anxiety, missed important alerts, delayed communication, accessibility cost and any fall in task quality." }, "decisionRules": { "primaryMeasureMustBePredeclared": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "At least 20% improvement from the participant's median baseline on the primary measure across two comparison sessions, with no more than a 5 percentage-point loss on the predeclared quality measure and no missed critical alert.", "qualification": "The suggested rule is an operational default, not a population effect-size claim. A task owner may set a stricter benchmark before data collection." }, "protocol": [ "Choose one meaningful, non-safety-critical task and define a correct unit of work.", "List interrupt sources and classify each as critical, time-bounded or deferrable; critical alerts always remain available.", "Run at least three baseline sessions with a fixed task window and a declared interruption script.", "Configure one low-burden intervention: notification batching, a visible focus boundary, a single-task queue, or a pre-switch resumption cue containing current state and next action.", "Run at least three matched comparison sessions and record time, errors, completed units, resumption lag and burden.", "Keep, adapt or retire the intervention based on the primary outcome, quality floor and burden rather than subjective busyness.", "Repeat after at least seven days without live coaching, then run the predeclared transfer task." ], "anchors": { "1": "A recorded baseline exists, but focus sessions, resumption or task quality are inconsistent or require substantial external support.", "2": "A narrow interruption-control routine improves the practised task only with reminders, protected conditions or active support.", "3": "The predeclared direct criterion and task-quality floor are met in two comparable sessions with no missed critical alert.", "4": "The L3 result survives the delayed retest and the predeclared transfer criterion is met on a second safe task or interruption source.", "5": "Performance remains reliable across at least three declared work constraints, and the person can create and explain a safe interruption plan for another nonclinical task without claiming general attention enhancement." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "Never silence alarms or alerts required for health, safeguarding, caregiving, security, transport or emergency response.", "Do not run interruption experiments while driving, using machinery, administering medication or supervising a dependent person.", "Stop if the intervention produces missed critical communication, unsafe hyperfocus, severe fatigue, pain or escalating distress." ], "clinical": [ "This module neither diagnoses nor treats ADHD or another clinical condition.", "Medication, sleep and treatment changes are outside scope and belong with a qualified clinician.", "Persistent functional impairment or distress routes to appropriate professional assessment rather than a higher practice dose." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Respect workplace monitoring, recording, availability, safeguarding and employment requirements.", "Do not record other people's communications or personal data without a lawful basis and informed permission." ], "accessibility": [ "Permit visual, auditory, haptic or assistive resumption cues and flexible session lengths.", "Record all supports without treating assistive technology, a support person or an ADHD-friendly environment as a penalty.", "Offer low-sensory and low-motor alternatives, rest breaks and asynchronous communication where the task permits." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Validate the resumption-lag and task-quality data fields in the Universal Module Lab.", "Pilot the protocol on at least two different real-work task types without safety-critical alert suppression.", "Demonstrate that the direct metric cannot be passed by doing less work or lowering quality.", "Accessibility review must include neurodivergent, fatigue-limited, screen-reader and motor-access routes.", "Clinical wording review must confirm that no ADHD-treatment or general attention claim is implied." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-INTERRUPTED-WORK-2008", "EVD-RESUMPTION-CUES-2003", "EVD-TASK-SWITCHING-2001" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-ADHERENCE-HABIT", "familyId": "CAP-SELF-REGULATION", "name": "Adherence & Habit Formation", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Implementation intentions support goal attainment across varied settings, but more recent objective outcomes are generally smaller than the historic aggregate. Habit automaticity evidence is largely self-report and highly variable.", "risk": "Variable; clinical gate for health and compulsive targets", "scope": "Design and test low-risk cue, environment and recovery systems that increase completion of one precisely defined behaviour under declared conditions.", "exclusions": "No willpower score, moral judgement, universal habit-formation timetable or treatment claim. Medication, glucose, diet, substance use, self-harm, compulsive behaviour and clinically prescribed rehabilitation targets require the relevant professional pathway.", "measures": { "direct": "Externally verifiable completion rate: completed eligible opportunities divided by all predeclared eligible opportunities. Also record cue-to-action latency and recovery after a miss. Self-reported automaticity is secondary and cannot by itself earn L3.", "retention": "Measure at least 14 consecutive days after the initial supported phase, including at least 7 days with prompts reduced to the predeclared maintenance level.", "transfer": "Apply the same design process to a predeclared second low-risk behaviour with a different cue or context; set its criterion before starting.", "burden": "Setup and tracking time, financial cost, rigidity, distress after misses, conflict with sleep or care, symptom change, privacy exposure and opportunity cost." }, "decisionRules": { "eligibleOpportunitiesMustBeDefined": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Meet either a predeclared domain benchmark or at least 80% of eligible opportunities for 14 consecutive days, with no serious adverse event and acceptable burden. If baseline is already high, use a harder quality or latency criterion rather than ceiling-level completion.", "qualification": "Eighty percent is an operational default, not a universal scientific threshold or a promise of automaticity." }, "protocol": [ "Select one small, low-risk behaviour and define what counts, what does not count and when an opportunity is ineligible.", "Record a baseline using an external trace where practical; do not reconstruct missed days from memory.", "Write one if-then plan linked to an observable cue and identify the most likely obstacle.", "Reduce friction for the desired action, increase friction for the competing action and create a minimum viable version for low-capacity days.", "Track completions, eligible opportunities, misses, recovery time and burden without streak punishment.", "After the supported phase, reduce prompts to the predeclared maintenance level and run the delayed test.", "Apply the same design process to the predeclared second low-risk behaviour for transfer." ], "anchors": { "1": "A baseline exists, but the defined behaviour is inconsistent, eligible opportunities are missed or completion depends on substantial support.", "2": "Completion improves on the practised behaviour while reminders, environmental support or accountability remain active.", "3": "The externally supported direct criterion is met across the full declared interval at acceptable burden.", "4": "The criterion survives the reduced-prompt delayed interval and the predeclared transfer behaviour meets its criterion.", "5": "The design remains reliable across at least three declared disruptions, includes a safe recovery-from-miss rule and can be explained or taught without prescribing clinical behaviour or promising automaticity." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "Do not reward sleep loss, pain escalation, skipped care, unsafe exercise, food restriction, medication changes or compulsive repetition.", "Never use shame, financial coercion, public exposure or punishment for a miss.", "Stop or redesign if rigidity, distress, conflict, symptom worsening or unsafe persistence increases." ], "clinical": [ "Clinician-prescribed medication, diabetes, renal, eating, substance-use, self-harm, OCD, rehabilitation or pain targets remain clinician governed.", "A Titan completion trace is not proof that a clinical regimen is safe or effective.", "Signs of compulsion, disordered eating, relapse risk or self-harm route to qualified support." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Workplace adherence systems must respect labour, privacy, equality and accessibility requirements.", "Do not collect health or behavioural data about another person without a lawful basis and informed consent." ], "accessibility": [ "Allow graded targets, energy-aware minimum versions, assistive reminders, support people and nonvisual tracking.", "Measure success against the declared accessible route; do not penalise accommodations.", "Offer a no-streak mode and a neutral recovery rule for fluctuating conditions and executive-function differences." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "The Universal Module Lab must compute eligible-opportunity completion without converting missing data to failure.", "Pilot the no-streak recovery rule and prove that it does not reward unsafe persistence.", "Add explicit clinical routing examples for medication, diabetes, eating, addiction and rehabilitation targets.", "Validate an objective or externally verifiable trace for each worked example; automaticity self-report remains secondary.", "Run an accessibility and compulsivity-language review before promotion." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-IMPLEMENTATION-INTENTIONS-2006", "EVD-MCII-2021", "EVD-HABIT-FORMATION-2010" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-STRESS-RECOVERY", "familyId": "CAP-SELF-REGULATION", "name": "Stress Recovery & Performance Under Pressure", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Stress-arousal reappraisal produces a small average task-performance benefit with heterogeneity and possible publication bias. HRV biofeedback evidence is promising for self-reported stress and anxiety but does not establish general pressure-proof performance.", "risk": "Professional gate", "scope": "Maintain a defined task standard and return toward a personal baseline after a consented, bounded, nonclinical performance stressor.", "exclusions": "No universal resilience, nervous-system reset, trauma treatment, anxiety treatment or immunity from stress. Meditation is not required. Clinical exposure therapy, flooding, humiliation and uncontrolled high-stakes stress are outside scope.", "measures": { "direct": "Predeclare an objective task-performance score under a bounded stressor and a recovery endpoint. Recovery time is measured from stressor end to the first sustained return within the person's predeclared baseline band using a non-diagnostic indicator such as task readiness, a simple rating, or optional device data.", "retention": "Repeat the same bounded stressor and task after at least 7 days without live coaching; retain the original performance and recovery criteria.", "transfer": "Use a predeclared different but equally low-risk performance stressor or context, never a more severe clinical exposure.", "burden": "Peak distress, delayed distress, sleep disruption, pain, fatigue, autonomic symptoms, device burden, avoidance, shame and time to recover." }, "decisionRules": { "stressorAndStopRulesMustBePredeclared": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Meet the task-specific performance floor and personal recovery ceiling in two bounded sessions without crossing a stop rule or producing delayed adverse effects.", "qualification": "No universal percentage improvement is specified because effects are heterogeneous and task dependent." }, "protocol": [ "Select one nonclinical performance task and obtain explicit consent for a bounded, reversible stressor.", "Record rested task performance, a personal recovery band, current readiness and all stop conditions.", "Run one baseline stressor session at the lowest meaningful intensity and record performance, recovery and delayed burden.", "Choose one narrow strategy: stress-arousal reappraisal, a rehearsed pre-performance plan, or optional paced-breathing/HRV biofeedback within medical and device constraints.", "Practise only at a tolerable dose; increase complexity only when the prior dose caused no concerning immediate or delayed response.", "Repeat the matched direct test, then complete delayed retention and the predeclared equally safe transfer context.", "Route clinical anxiety, trauma, panic, dissociation, severe autonomic symptoms or functional deterioration to qualified care." ], "anchors": { "1": "A consented baseline exists, but task performance or recovery is inconsistent, or substantial support is required.", "2": "Performance or recovery improves under the practised bounded stressor with active coaching or a tightly controlled setting.", "3": "The task-performance floor and recovery ceiling are met in two bounded sessions with no stop-rule breach or concerning delayed effect.", "4": "The L3 result survives delayed retest and the predeclared criterion is met under an equally safe novel performance context.", "5": "Performance and recovery remain reliable across at least three consented nonclinical constraints, and the person can explain a safe personal protocol without delivering therapy or prescribing exposure to others." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "No forced public performance, humiliation, deception, sleep deprivation, pain challenge, breath holding, hyperventilation or physical danger.", "Stop immediately for chest pain, fainting, severe breathlessness, new neurological symptoms, dissociation, panic escalation or any participant withdrawal of consent.", "Wearable HRV and pulse data are optional, non-diagnostic and never override symptoms or clinical advice." ], "clinical": [ "Known trauma, panic disorder, severe anxiety, significant autonomic or cardiac symptoms, recent crisis or clinical exposure goals require qualified professional oversight.", "This module does not replace CBT, exposure therapy, medication review or emergency mental-health care.", "If symptoms persist outside the task or daily function worsens, pause and seek appropriate professional support." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Public, workplace and educational simulations require informed consent, a safe opt-out and compliance with equality, safeguarding and employment rules.", "Biometric data collection must meet applicable health-data, privacy and device requirements." ], "accessibility": [ "Use equivalent performance contexts that do not require standing, speaking, vision, hearing or a specific motor response unless that function is the declared target.", "Allow remote, seated, text-based, AAC and support-person routes and longer recovery windows.", "Do not interpret autonomic differences, disability-related recovery time or use of an accommodation as lower capability when the declared function is preserved." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Independent clinical-safety review must approve the consumer/clinical boundary and stop rules.", "The Universal Module Lab must separate task performance, recovery, delayed burden and optional physiology.", "Pilot participants must be able to withdraw without penalty and all stressors must be reversible and nonclinical.", "Demonstrate that L4 transfer never means increasing stressor severity.", "Publish an adverse-event and delayed-effect review rule before promotion." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-META-2024", "EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-GRE-2010", "EVD-HRV-BIOFEEDBACK-2017", "EVD-NICE-SOCIAL-ANXIETY-2024" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-INFORMATION-VERIFICATION", "familyId": "CAP-COMMUNICATION", "name": "Information Verification, Provenance & Manipulation Resistance", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Lateral-reading interventions improve online source evaluation in educational settings, and inoculation and embedded phishing training show narrow gains. Retention, cross-domain transfer, adversarial adaptation and false distrust remain material limits.", "risk": "Variable; authorised-simulation and distress gates", "scope": "Evaluate the source, provenance, corroboration and manipulation tactics of bounded information items using an auditable process before accepting, sharing or acting on them.", "exclusions": "No lie detection, mind reading, universal scam immunity, real/fake certainty, political truth score or authority-by-brand. Correct source evaluation does not by itself establish that every claim from that source is true.", "measures": { "direct": "Accuracy on a balanced, answer-keyed set of unfamiliar items, with false-accept and false-reject rates reported separately; completion of an auditable provenance trace; and time to decision. The answer key must be independent of the learner.", "retention": "After at least 14 days, use a new balanced item set with no repeated exemplars and the same scoring rule.", "transfer": "Predeclare a different modality or threat class, such as article-to-image, source-to-claim, ordinary web source-to-authorised phishing simulation, or familiar-domain-to-unfamiliar-domain.", "burden": "Verification time, false distrust, missed legitimate communication, exposure to disturbing material, privacy leakage, tool cost and escalation to professional review." }, "decisionRules": { "balancedItemSetRequired": true, "independentAnswerKeyRequired": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Meet the predeclared benchmark on at least 20 unfamiliar items, with accuracy of at least 80%, both false-accept and false-reject rates reported, a complete provenance trace for every high-risk decision, and no unsafe link execution.", "qualification": "The 80% rule is a candidate operational default. High-stakes claims require domain-professional verification regardless of the Titan level." }, "protocol": [ "Define the item class, decision stakes, balanced answer key and permitted verification tools before testing.", "Record a blinded baseline on unfamiliar items and separate source credibility from claim accuracy.", "Train a compact workflow: pause; identify the original source; read laterally; seek independent corroboration; inspect provenance or metadata where appropriate; and state residual uncertainty.", "Practise recognising bounded manipulation techniques without using a single visual cue or brand as proof.", "Use only inert, authorised phishing simulations; never open live suspicious attachments, run unknown code or submit credentials.", "Retest on a nonrepeating balanced set after the delay, then run the predeclared cross-modality or cross-threat transfer.", "Escalate medical, legal, financial, safety, identity and high-impact decisions to qualified or authoritative verification." ], "anchors": { "1": "A blinded baseline exists, but decisions are inconsistent, provenance is missing or substantial support is required.", "2": "Accuracy and provenance improve on a practised item class with checklists, prompts or guided search.", "3": "The predeclared direct benchmark is met on unfamiliar items with false accepts and false rejects reported and no unsafe action.", "4": "The result survives a nonrepeating delayed set and meets the predeclared criterion in a novel modality, domain or authorised threat class.", "5": "Performance remains reliable across at least three declared modalities or threat classes and an independent benchmark; the person can teach the verification workflow while preserving uncertainty and avoiding claims of scam immunity." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "Use inert replicas, screenshots, isolated samples or authorised simulations; never interact with live malware, suspicious attachments or credential-harvesting pages.", "Do not dox, harass, impersonate, entrap or publicly accuse a person as part of verification practice.", "Use content warnings and stop rules for graphic, hateful, sexual, traumatic or personally targeted material." ], "clinical": [ "This module does not validate paranoia, delusional certainty or compulsive checking.", "If verification practice intensifies fear, surveillance behaviour, inability to disengage or fixed persecutory beliefs, pause and seek qualified support.", "No mental-health diagnosis or lie-detection inference may be made from a person's information choices." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Phishing simulations require explicit organisational authorisation, a nonpunitive design and compliance with computer-misuse, interception, employment and privacy law.", "Respect copyright, data protection, defamation, platform terms and evidentiary rules.", "The module is not legal, financial, medical or forensic certification." ], "accessibility": [ "Provide screen-reader compatible pages, transcripts, captions, alt text, keyboard access and nonvisual provenance routes.", "Allow extra time, reduced item sets and assistive search without weakening the declared decision standard.", "Do not rely on colour, audio, facial expression, spelling or visual polish as the sole trust cue." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Create balanced, independently keyed benchmark sets with documented provenance and no partisan or brand-based shortcut.", "Validate false-accept, false-reject, uncertainty and trace-completeness scoring in the Universal Module Lab.", "Authorised phishing simulations must pass legal, privacy, security and nonpunitive review.", "Add evidence or narrow the transfer claim for synthetic image, audio and video provenance before those modalities can count toward L4 or L5.", "Test for increased false distrust and compulsive checking as adverse outcomes." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-LATERAL-READING-2019", "EVD-LATERAL-READING-FIELD-2022", "EVD-INOCULATION-LONGITUDINAL-2021", "EVD-PHISHING-RETENTION-2007" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-FIRST-AID-READINESS", "familyId": "CAP-MAKING-OPS", "name": "First-Aid & Emergency Readiness", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Instrumented CPR and scenario assessment are highly measurable, current guidelines support feedback devices and frequent practice, and skills demonstrably decay. Transfer from simulation to an actual emergency and non-CPR first-aid components requires narrower jurisdiction-specific evidence.", "risk": "Professional and jurisdiction gate", "scope": "Recognise an emergency, activate the correct local response and perform one declared lay-responder skill set in standards-concordant simulation using a manikin, trainer or validated scenario.", "exclusions": "No diagnosis, treatment licence, guaranteed survival, real-patient experimentation, advanced life support, invasive procedure or replacement for emergency dispatch. A Titan level is not a first-aid or CPR certificate.", "measures": { "direct": "Use the current pass criteria of a recognised jurisdiction-appropriate course or independent assessor. For CPR/AED, record instrumented compression rate, depth, recoil, hands-off time where available, AED-trainer sequence and emergency-call sequence. For other first-aid targets, use a validated scenario checklist with critical errors defined in advance.", "retention": "Repeat an uncoached instrumented or independently observed assessment at 90 days. If the recognised provider requires a shorter interval, use the shorter interval.", "transfer": "Complete a predeclared unfamiliar but standards-concordant scenario with changed location, bystander complication or equipment layout, using only manikins, trainers and simulation.", "burden": "Pain, fatigue, dizziness, injury risk, emotional distress, equipment and course cost, accessibility barriers, time, infection-control burden and confidence–competence mismatch." }, "decisionRules": { "externalStandardControls": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Pass the current direct skill assessment for the declared scope with no critical error. Titan does not substitute its own numerical threshold when a recognised provider standard exists.", "qualification": "Simulated readiness is not guaranteed real-world performance or survival benefit." }, "protocol": [ "Choose a jurisdiction, population and declared scope, such as adult compression-only CPR/AED, full basic life support, choking response or one recognised first-aid unit.", "Record local emergency numbers, dispatcher role, consent boundaries and current recognised guidance.", "Complete training through a recognised provider or qualified instructor using manikins, AED trainers and inert equipment.", "Run an immediate independent or instrumented assessment and record every critical error, not only a total score.", "Schedule brief refreshers and an uncoached 90-day retention assessment; mark the Titan level historical if the review window or certification expires.", "Run one unfamiliar standards-concordant simulation for transfer, including activation of emergency services and safe scene assessment.", "In any real emergency, contact the local emergency service promptly and follow dispatcher and qualified-responder instructions." ], "anchors": { "1": "A safe simulated baseline exists, but recognition, sequencing or psychomotor performance is inconsistent or requires substantial prompting.", "2": "The practised sequence improves with instructor prompts, real-time feedback or a familiar scenario.", "3": "The current recognised direct assessment is passed for the declared scope with no critical error.", "4": "The assessment is passed uncoached at the required delayed interval and the unfamiliar standards-concordant simulation meets its predeclared criterion.", "5": "A current independent assessment or recognised certification confirms robust performance across at least three safe simulated constraints. Instructor status is not required and is never inferred." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "Use manikins and AED trainers; never practise chest compressions, abdominal thrusts, airway manoeuvres, tourniquets, injections or electrical shock on a live person.", "Do not delay calling emergency services to complete a Titan checklist or collect data.", "Stop for pain, dizziness, faintness, breathlessness, autonomic symptoms, injury or emotional distress; use a qualified instructor and appropriate infection control." ], "clinical": [ "The module teaches response sequences, not diagnosis or medical treatment.", "People with physical, cardiac, autonomic, musculoskeletal, pregnancy-related or trauma constraints should obtain appropriate professional advice before psychomotor practice.", "Actual emergencies are governed by emergency dispatch and qualified responders, not the Titan level." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Use current local emergency numbers, recognised guidance, scope-of-practice rules and certification requirements; Good Samaritan and duty-to-act rules vary.", "A Titan record must never be represented as statutory, workplace or professional certification.", "Training providers, instructors and equipment must meet applicable local requirements." ], "accessibility": [ "Define accessible responder roles such as recognising the emergency, calling dispatch, retrieving an AED, directing bystanders, communicating history or guiding access.", "Credit only the role actually demonstrated; an accessible communication role does not silently become a CPR psychomotor pass.", "Provide seated, visual, auditory, tactile, AAC and support-person routes and accessible equipment where recognised by the relevant standard." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Map at least UK/ERC and US/AHA lay-responder pathways without merging conflicting jurisdictional requirements.", "Require recognised-provider or independent-assessor criteria for L3 and L5; Titan cannot self-certify.", "Validate instrumented-manikin and scenario-checklist import fields in the Universal Module Lab.", "Add narrow evidence and critical-error definitions for every non-CPR first-aid exemplar before it is scoreable.", "Complete clinical, physical-access, safeguarding, infection-control and legal review before promotion." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-AHA-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2025", "EVD-CPR-FEEDBACK-RETENTION-2021", "EVD-ERC-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2021", "EVD-ERC-FIRST-AID-2021" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY", "familyId": "CAP-SELF-REGULATION", "name": "Sleep Regularity & Recovery", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "The Sleep Regularity Index is clearly defined and can be calculated from sufficiently complete sleep/wake diaries or instrumented actigraphy. Observational evidence supports its construct relevance, while a small 2026 randomised trial found that a brief intervention reduced weekend–weekday sleep-onset discrepancy by 54 minutes and maintained that change at the next period, but did not increase actigraphic total sleep time. Measurement evidence is therefore stronger than evidence for a broadly transferable consumer intervention.", "risk": "Professional gate; dangerous-sleepiness and sleep-disorder routing required", "scope": "Measure and improve the stability of one personally feasible sleep–wake schedule under declared conditions while preserving adequate sleep opportunity and daytime safety.", "exclusions": "No diagnosis or treatment of insomnia, sleep apnoea, circadian-rhythm disorder, shift-work disorder or another clinical condition. No CBT-I, stimulus control, sleep-restriction therapy, forced phase shifting, all-nighters, sleep deprivation, polyphasic sleep compression, medication or supplement changes, light therapy, universal bedtime or chronotype claim.", "measures": { "direct": "Predeclare one primary regularity measure and retain it throughout the protocol: Sleep Regularity Index calculated from complete time-stamped sleep/wake states; diary-derived day-to-day sleep-onset and wake-time variability; or actigraphy-derived Sleep Regularity Index. Record measurement mode, epoch, valid-day rule, missing-data rule and a sleep-duration or sleep-opportunity safety floor before baseline. Diary-derived metrics are self-recorded; actigraphy-derived metrics are instrumented. Sleep efficiency may be recorded as a secondary descriptive measure only and cannot be optimized by reducing time in bed.", "retention": "Repeat the same measurement mode across a new 14-day window at least 30 days after the supported phase, without live coaching and using only the predeclared maintenance supports.", "transfer": "When a naturally occurring, low-risk schedule change occurs, test whether the predeclared regularity and sleep-opportunity criteria remain satisfied or are safely re-established. Never create travel, shift work, sleep loss or another disruption solely to test transfer.", "burden": "Tracking time, device cost, alarm burden, anxiety or orthosomnia, daytime sleepiness, missed obligations, conflict with pain, disability, caregiving, work, culture or chronotype, and any safety-critical error or near miss." }, "decisionRules": { "measurementModeMustBePredeclared": true, "diaryMetricsAreSelfRecorded": true, "actigraphyMetricsAreInstrumented": true, "sleepEfficiencyIsSecondaryOnly": true, "inducedSleepDisruptionIsProhibited": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Candidate-only draft: meet the predeclared regularity criterion in two consecutive 14-day windows while preserving the declared sleep-opportunity or duration floor, with no worsening of daytime sleepiness and no safety-critical error or near miss. No universal Sleep Regularity Index or sleep-efficiency pass mark is authorised before promotion.", "qualification": "Fourteen days is an operational candidate window, not a universal biological threshold. A regularity gain cannot be earned by sleeping less, omitting naps or missing data, or selecting the target after results are known." }, "protocol": [ "Screen for dangerous daytime sleepiness, persistent insomnia symptoms, suspected apnoea, shift-related impairment, recent mania or another condition requiring professional assessment.", "Choose one personally feasible schedule and one primary regularity metric; record whether evidence is self-recorded or instrumented.", "Collect at least 14 consecutive baseline days without reconstructing missing nights from memory. A Sleep Regularity Index requires sufficiently complete sleep/wake-state data, including declared naps.", "Predeclare the regularity target, valid-day and missing-data rules, sleep-opportunity floor, daytime-safety indicators and stop conditions.", "Choose one ordinary nonclinical scheduling support, such as a calendar buffer, wind-down reminder, morning routine cue or better placement of obligations. Do not restrict sleep opportunity or change medication, supplements, light treatment or clinical equipment.", "Run two comparison windows and retain, adapt or stop the support based on regularity, preserved sleep opportunity, daytime function and burden.", "Repeat the 30-day delayed window and wait for a naturally occurring safe schedule change before attempting the transfer test." ], "anchors": { "1": "A baseline exists, but the record is incomplete, the schedule is unstable or daytime safety and sleep opportunity have not been protected.", "2": "Regularity improves under the practised conditions with active reminders or substantial support, while the safety floor remains intact.", "3": "The predeclared direct criterion is met in two consecutive complete windows without reducing sleep opportunity, worsening daytime sleepiness or crossing a stop rule.", "4": "The result survives the delayed window and the criterion is safely maintained or re-established during a naturally occurring schedule change.", "5": "Performance remains reliable across at least three naturally occurring constraints over the review period, with an independently reviewed record and an accurate explanation of the measurement and clinical boundaries." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "No sleep restriction, deprivation, all-nighter, forced wakefulness or radical polyphasic schedule may be used.", "Do not drive, cycle, operate machinery, supervise a dependent person or perform safety-critical work when dangerously sleepy.", "Stop for severe sleepiness, confusion, faintness, a safety-critical error, a near miss or material deterioration in daytime function." ], "clinical": [ "Persistent difficulty sleeping, loud snoring, witnessed breathing pauses, nocturnal choking, marked shift-related sleepiness, unusual sleep behaviour, restless-leg symptoms or recurrent unintended sleep episodes route to qualified assessment.", "Current or recent mania, psychosis, suicidal crisis or clinically significant deterioration requires professional care rather than schedule experimentation.", "CBT-I, stimulus control, sleep-restriction therapy, medication, melatonin, light therapy and CPAP or other device changes remain clinician governed." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Workplace fatigue-management, working-time, transport and safety rules override a Titan protocol.", "Sleep records are sensitive health and employment data and must not be used for coercive monitoring, discipline or discrimination.", "A Titan record is not medical clearance or proof of fitness for work, driving or duty." ], "accessibility": [ "Treat chronotype, disability, pain, nocturnal care, religious practice, split sleep, night work and caregiving as design constraints rather than moral failure.", "Permit diaries, accessible digital logs, support-person entries or optional wearables, while preserving the evidence-mode label and not pretending the modes are identical.", "Stop or simplify tracking if it causes compulsive checking, sleep anxiety or orthosomnia." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Validate the Sleep Regularity Index implementation against published examples and specify the epoch, completeness and missing-data rules.", "Prove that missing nights, omitted naps or reduced sleep opportunity cannot improve the score.", "Establish an interpretable minimum-change or criterion policy before any level becomes scoreable; do not invent a universal SRI pass mark.", "Keep diary-derived results labelled self-recorded and actigraphy-derived results labelled instrumented throughout the Cockpit and exports.", "Independent sleep-clinical review must approve the insomnia, apnoea, shift-work, mania and dangerous-sleepiness routing.", "Pilot a no-wearable route and test accessibility with pain, disability, caregiving, neurodivergence and nonstandard schedules.", "Monitor daytime sleepiness, safety incidents and orthosomnia as adverse outcomes.", "Confirm that retention and transfer never require an induced sleep disruption." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INDEX-2017", "EVD-CONSENSUS-SLEEP-DIARY-2012", "EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INTERVENTION-2026", "EVD-AASM-INSOMNIA-GUIDELINE-2021", "EVD-SLEEP-DURATION-CONSENSUS-2015", "EVD-POLYPHASIC-SLEEP-CONSENSUS-2021" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false }, { "id": "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY", "familyId": "CAP-PERCEPTION-NAV", "name": "Functional Physical Capacity", "status": "candidate", "promotionStatus": "not-promoted", "evidenceGrade": "Moderate", "evidenceGradeProvisional": true, "evidenceGradeRationale": "Grip dynamometry, the 30-second chair stand, Timed Up & Go and the Short Physical Performance Battery have substantial instrument-specific validity evidence. The umbrella remains Moderate because original validation populations, protocols and reference values differ materially; no single measure establishes global physical capacity, and apparent change can reflect practice, equipment, assistance or setup.", "risk": "Professional gate", "scope": "Select, standardise and track one low-risk, instrument-defined aspect of functional capacity, such as grip, sit-to-stand performance, basic mobility or an approved submaximal walking test. Titan measures performance and change; it does not prescribe exercise, rehabilitation, intensity, dose or progression.", "exclusions": "No diagnosis, medical clearance, rehabilitation plan, fitness programming, maximal or exhaustion testing, pain challenge, fall challenge, weight-loss claim, universal fitness score or proof of occupational, sporting or military readiness.", "measures": { "direct": "Use one validated test and its fixed protocol: kilograms or newtons for grip dynamometry; completed repetitions for a specified chair-stand test; seconds and observed critical errors for Timed Up & Go; or distance for an appropriately supervised submaximal walking test. Record device, chair height, footwear, assistive aid, assistance, course, assessor, time and symptom state. Do not aggregate incompatible tests into a universal score.", "retention": "Repeat the identical protocol after at least 28 days, using the same accommodations and no extra warm-up or assistance beyond the predeclared standard.", "transfer": "Complete a predeclared second validated measure or functional task selected by a qualified assessor as relevant to the same real-world function. Transfer must be measured directly and cannot be inferred from the first test.", "burden": "Pain, fatigue, breathlessness, dizziness, falls or near misses, glucose disruption, delayed symptom worsening, equipment and assessor cost, space, transport, assistance and recovery time." }, "decisionRules": { "externalProtocolControls": true, "crossTestAggregationProhibited": true, "programmingOutsideScope": true, "suggestedL3Rule": "Meet the current instrument- and population-specific criterion or exceed a predeclared test-specific measurement-error or meaningful-change threshold in two witnessed sessions, with identical protocol and accommodations and no stop-rule breach.", "qualification": "Titan supplies no universal cut-off. Norms are descriptive references, not diagnoses. A threshold validated in older adults, frail patients or a clinical population must not be silently applied to another group." }, "protocol": [ "Define the functional question and select one validated measure appropriate to the person's age, condition, access needs and risk.", "Obtain professional clearance when fall, fracture, cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, metabolic, autonomic, pregnancy-related, postsurgical or significant pain risk is present.", "Lock the published protocol, equipment, environment, assistance, assistive device, assessor and stop rules before testing.", "Run a safe familiarisation if the published protocol permits it, then collect the witnessed or instrumented baseline and every symptom or critical error.", "If the person undertakes training or rehabilitation, that plan remains separately governed by the appropriate professional; Titan records outcomes only.", "Retest with the identical protocol, then complete the delayed retest.", "Use a separately approved related measure for transfer and report agreement or disagreement rather than manufacturing a combined score." ], "anchors": { "1": "A safe baseline is incomplete, inconsistent or requires substantial support, or the protocol and accommodations are not yet standardised.", "2": "The declared test is completed safely and consistently with support, familiarisation or active feedback.", "3": "The current external or predeclared test-specific direct criterion is met in two witnessed sessions with no critical error or stop-rule breach.", "4": "The result survives the delayed retest and the separately measured related task meets its predeclared criterion.", "5": "An independent qualified assessor confirms sustained performance across at least two validated measures and declared constraints, without implying global fitness, diagnosis or authority to prescribe." }, "reviewWindowDays": 90, "guardrails": { "safety": [ "No maximal lift, exhaustion test, deliberate fall, unsupported balance challenge, pain challenge or test-to-failure is permitted.", "Stop immediately for chest pain, severe breathlessness, faintness, new neurological symptoms, acute pain, loss of balance, unsafe glucose state or participant withdrawal.", "Use a spotter, rails, usual assistive device and clinical setting whenever the selected protocol or individual risk requires them." ], "clinical": [ "Recent fracture, surgery, fall, cardiac or respiratory event, progressive neurological change, significant autonomic symptoms, unstable diabetes, pregnancy-related risk or unexplained functional decline routes to qualified assessment.", "Test results do not diagnose frailty, sarcopenia, cardiovascular disease, neurological disease or fall risk outside the validated use of the selected instrument.", "Rehabilitation and exercise dose, progression and contraindications remain professionally governed." ], "jurisdiction": [ "Occupational, sporting, driving, insurance and statutory fitness standards remain controlled by their authorised bodies.", "A Titan level is not medical clearance, workplace certification or a professional fitness qualification.", "Physical and health data must be handled under applicable privacy, equality and employment rules." ], "accessibility": [ "Use a measure that tests the declared function rather than penalising a person for being unable to stand, walk, grip or see when that function is not the intended target.", "Record chair height, prosthesis, orthosis, wheelchair, walking aid, communication support and human assistance, and keep them identical across comparisons where feasible.", "Do not compare results across incompatible devices, body positions, chair heights, course lengths or assistance conditions." ] }, "promotionGates": [ "Publish an instrument pack for every accepted test containing the exact protocol, intended population, units, contraindications, critical errors, test–retest evidence and acceptable change rule.", "Prove that equipment, chair height, assistance, course length, device substitution and practice effects cannot silently inflate a level.", "Require witnessed or independently assessed evidence for L3 and L5; self-report alone cannot pass.", "Clinical and accessibility review must cover falls, fractures, cardiac, respiratory, neurological, metabolic, autonomic, pain and wheelchair-access routes.", "Demonstrate that the module never generates exercise or rehabilitation programming.", "Validate a transfer rule that measures a second function directly and never infers global fitness.", "Resolve the family-placement question before promotion.", "Pilot across different ages and ability levels without transporting population-specific norms into unsupported groups." ], "evidenceIds": [ "EVD-CHAIR-STAND-1999", "EVD-TUG-1991", "EVD-GRIP-NORMS-2014", "EVD-SPPB-1994", "EVD-ATS-6MWT-2002" ], "legacyIds": [], "registryStatus": "candidate", "scoreable": false, "availableForAssessment": false } ], "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." }, { "id": "EVD-INTERRUPTED-WORK-2008", "title": "The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress", "source": "Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’08)", "year": 2008, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "In a controlled knowledge-work simulation, interruptions changed work behaviour and increased reported stress, frustration, time pressure and effort even when participants compensated with faster work.", "limits": "A small laboratory simulation, not an intervention trial or evidence of a general focus-improvement protocol; faster completion did not mean a universal productivity gain.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357072" }, { "id": "EVD-RESUMPTION-CUES-2003", "title": "Preparing to resume an interrupted task: effects of prospective goal encoding and retrospective rehearsal", "source": "International Journal of Human-Computer Studies", "year": 2003, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Preparation during an interruption warning interval and goal encoding can shorten resumption disruption on a defined experimental task.", "limits": "Artificial dynamic task and controlled interruption timing; does not establish transfer to all work, treatment of ADHD or a durable general attention change.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00023-5" }, { "id": "EVD-TASK-SWITCHING-2001", "title": "Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching", "source": "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance", "year": 2001, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Four experiments found measurable time costs when participants switched between task rules rather than repeating one rule.", "limits": "Laboratory classification and arithmetic tasks; establishes a switch-cost phenomenon, not the effectiveness of a specific workplace routine or general executive-function training.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11518143/" }, { "id": "EVD-IMPLEMENTATION-INTENTIONS-2006", "title": "Implementation Intentions and Goal Achievement: A Meta‐analysis of Effects and Processes", "source": "Advances in Experimental Social Psychology", "year": 2006, "grade": "Strong", "claim": "Across varied studies, if-then implementation intentions improved goal attainment, with a historic aggregate estimate near d = 0.65.", "limits": "The synthesis combines heterogeneous laboratory and field outcomes; later reviews of objective behaviours often find smaller effects, so the historic aggregate is not a promised individual gain.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1" }, { "id": "EVD-MCII-2021", "title": "A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Mental Contrasting With Implementation Intentions on Goal Attainment", "source": "Frontiers in Psychology", "year": 2021, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "A meta-analysis of 21 articles comprising 24 independent field studies (15,907 participants) found a small-to-medium aggregate benefit for mental contrasting with implementation intentions (g = 0.336).", "limits": "This is a combined intervention rather than implementation intentions alone; intervention style moderated results and publication bias may make the true effect smaller.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.565202" }, { "id": "EVD-HABIT-FORMATION-2010", "title": "How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world", "source": "European Journal of Social Psychology", "year": 2010, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Repeated performance of a chosen behaviour in a stable context was associated with an asymptotic increase in self-reported automaticity, with large individual variation.", "limits": "Ninety-six volunteers, self-selected eating, drinking or activity behaviours and self-reported automaticity; no universal 21-day or fixed-day habit guarantee and no proof that automaticity equals beneficial adherence.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.674" }, { "id": "EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-META-2024", "title": "Effectiveness of stress arousal reappraisal and stress-is-enhancing mindset interventions on task performance outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials", "source": "Scientific Reports", "year": 2024, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Across 44 effect sizes, stress-arousal reappraisal and stress-is-enhancing interventions produced a small average improvement in task performance (d = 0.23).", "limits": "Moderate heterogeneity, mostly young nonclinical samples and evidence of publication asymmetry; trim-and-fill reduced the estimate to d = 0.14 and the prediction interval included negative effects.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-58408-w" }, { "id": "EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-GRE-2010", "title": "Turning the knots in your stomach into bows: Reappraising arousal improves performance on the GRE", "source": "Journal of Experimental Social Psychology", "year": 2010, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "A brief arousal-reappraisal instruction improved mathematics performance in a specific GRE-related testing context relative to control.", "limits": "Narrow test-performance setting and limited sample; does not establish universal academic improvement, anxiety treatment or safe self-directed clinical exposure.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.08.015" }, { "id": "EVD-HRV-BIOFEEDBACK-2017", "title": "The effect of heart rate variability biofeedback training on stress and anxiety: a meta-analysis", "source": "Psychological Medicine", "year": 2017, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "HRV biofeedback was associated with reductions in self-reported stress and anxiety across included studies.", "limits": "Study quality, populations and protocols varied; self-reported symptom change does not prove improved task performance, faster recovery, diagnosis or suitability for people with cardiac or autonomic conditions.", "url": "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28478782/" }, { "id": "EVD-NICE-SOCIAL-ANXIETY-2024", "title": "Social anxiety disorder: recognition, assessment and treatment", "source": "National Institute for Health and Care Excellence", "year": 2013, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Clinical social anxiety requires recognised assessment and treatment pathways; exposure is situated within structured psychological treatment rather than a generic consumer performance drill.", "limits": "Clinical guidance, not evidence that Titan's nonclinical module treats anxiety; jurisdiction is England and recommendations must be applied by appropriate professionals. Published 22 May 2013; last reviewed 21 May 2024. The stable evidence ID retains its original 2024 suffix for compatibility.", "url": "https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg159" }, { "id": "EVD-LATERAL-READING-2019", "title": "Improving university students’ web savvy: An intervention study", "source": "British Journal of Educational Psychology", "year": 2019, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Instruction in civic online reasoning, including lateral reading, improved university students' evaluation of online sources in the studied tasks.", "limits": "Educational tasks and student population; no proof of durable cross-domain scam resistance, synthetic-media detection or correct judgement in every live case.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12279" }, { "id": "EVD-LATERAL-READING-FIELD-2022", "title": "Lateral reading on the open Internet: A district-wide field study in high school government classes", "source": "Journal of Educational Psychology", "year": 2022, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Students in treatment classrooms improved more than controls in evaluating digital content after a classroom lateral-reading intervention.", "limits": "High-school government-course context with teacher professional development; transfer to adults, other domains, high-stakes decisions and long retention requires direct testing.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000740" }, { "id": "EVD-INOCULATION-LONGITUDINAL-2021", "title": "Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments", "source": "Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied", "year": 2021, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Three longitudinal experiments found that an active misinformation-inoculation game could improve resistance to tested misinformation techniques beyond an immediate posttest.", "limits": "Effects depend on item design and can decay; judging a technique or headline is not equivalent to verifying source provenance or resisting every manipulation in the wild.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000315" }, { "id": "EVD-PHISHING-RETENTION-2007", "title": "Getting users to pay attention to anti-phishing education: evaluation of retention and transfer", "source": "Proceedings of the Anti-Phishing Working Groups 2nd Annual eCrime Researchers Summit", "year": 2007, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Embedded anti-phishing education was evaluated with behavioural phishing decisions, including retention and transfer to novel phishing examples.", "limits": "Older email and web threat patterns; authorised research setting; results do not establish immunity to current adversarial attacks, and live phishing simulation raises legal, privacy and security requirements.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1145/1299015.1299022" }, { "id": "EVD-AHA-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2025", "title": "Part 12: Resuscitation Education Science: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care", "source": "Circulation", "year": 2025, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Current AHA education guidance recommends CPR feedback devices during skills training and supports evidence-based approaches to acquisition, mastery and retention.", "limits": "Clinical guideline and US framework; it does not make Titan a training provider, establish certification or guarantee real-event survival from a simulator score.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000001374" }, { "id": "EVD-CPR-FEEDBACK-RETENTION-2021", "title": "Cardiopulmonary resuscitation skill training and retention in teens (CPR START): A randomized control trial in high school students", "source": "Resuscitation Plus", "year": 2021, "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "Real-time visual feedback improved instrumented CPR skill acquisition and retained an advantage at 10 and 28 weeks in high-school students; the difference was no longer significant at 52 weeks.", "limits": "Compression-only simulation in students, not actual cardiac arrests or a complete first-aid curriculum; the result demonstrates both measurability and decay, not guaranteed real-world action.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resplu.2021.100079" }, { "id": "EVD-ERC-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2021", "title": "European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Education for resuscitation", "source": "Resuscitation", "year": 2021, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "ERC guidance addresses education, simulation, feedback, skill maintenance and assessment from basic through advanced resuscitation.", "limits": "European framework whose requirements must be checked against the current local 2025 guidance and recognised provider; not a Titan certification standard by itself.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.016" }, { "id": "EVD-ERC-FIRST-AID-2021", "title": "European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: First aid", "source": "Resuscitation", "year": 2021, "grade": "Framework", "claim": "ERC provides evidence-informed first-aid recommendations across a bounded set of emergency conditions and interventions.", "limits": "Recommendations are condition- and jurisdiction-specific, change over time and do not supply one universal first-aid performance score; each scoreable exemplar needs current critical-error criteria.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2021.02.013" }, { "id": "EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INDEX-2017", "title": "Irregular sleep/wake patterns are associated with poorer academic performance and delayed circadian and sleep/wake timing", "source": "Scientific Reports", "year": 2017, "publicationDate": "2017-06-12", "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "In 61 undergraduates followed for 30 days, the authors defined the Sleep Regularity Index as the probability of being in the same sleep/wake state at time points 24 hours apart and found associations with circadian timing and academic performance.", "limits": "Observational, small and undergraduate-specific; it cannot establish causality. The study used sleep diaries, so those SRI data were self-recorded rather than objective.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03171-4", "sourceNote": "Publisher title and date verified against Scientific Reports. The original method used 30 days of sleep diaries." }, { "id": "EVD-CONSENSUS-SLEEP-DIARY-2012", "title": "The Consensus Sleep Diary: Standardizing Prospective Sleep Self-Monitoring", "source": "Sleep", "year": 2012, "publicationDate": "2012-02-01", "grade": "Framework", "claim": "An expert- and patient-informed process produced a standard core diary for prospective sleep self-monitoring.", "limits": "The publication calls the diary a living document requiring further testing and validation. Diary variables, including diary-derived sleep efficiency, remain self-recorded.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5665/sleep.1642", "sourceNote": "Exact title and publication date verified on the journal record." }, { "id": "EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INTERVENTION-2026", "title": "Effects of a single session intervention on actigraphy-measured sleep for adolescents with insufficient and irregular sleep: A randomized controlled trial", "source": "Sleep Health", "year": 2026, "publicationDate": "2026-01-19", "issueDate": "2026-04", "grade": "Emerging", "claim": "Among 40 adolescents with analyzable actigraphy, the intervention reduced weekend–weekday sleep-onset discrepancy by 54 minutes and the increased regularity was maintained at the next study period.", "limits": "Small sample aged 13–15, clinician session, secondary outcomes and short follow-up; total sleep time did not significantly change.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2025.12.008", "sourceNote": "First online publication was 19 January 2026; volume 12, issue 2, pages 333–339 is dated April 2026." }, { "id": "EVD-AASM-INSOMNIA-GUIDELINE-2021", "title": "Behavioral and psychological treatments for chronic insomnia disorder in adults: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline", "source": "Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine", "year": 2021, "publicationDate": "2021-02-01", "grade": "Framework", "claim": "The guideline places multicomponent CBT-I and components including sleep-restriction therapy within clinical treatment of chronic insomnia and suggests not using sleep hygiene alone as treatment.", "limits": "Clinical guideline for adults with chronic insomnia, not evidence that a consumer regularity protocol treats insomnia.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.8986", "sourceNote": "Exact title, date and recommendations verified on the journal record." }, { "id": "EVD-SLEEP-DURATION-CONSENSUS-2015", "title": "Recommended Amount of Sleep for a Healthy Adult: A Joint Consensus Statement of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and Sleep Research Society", "source": "Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine", "year": 2015, "publicationDate": "2015-06-15", "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Provides consensus context for protecting adequate sleep duration in healthy adults.", "limits": "Population-level guidance for healthy adults, not an individual prescription and not a regularity intervention.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.4758", "sourceNote": "Exact title uses 'Consensus Statement', not 'Consensus Recommendation'." }, { "id": "EVD-POLYPHASIC-SLEEP-CONSENSUS-2021", "title": "Adverse impact of polyphasic sleep patterns in humans: Report of the National Sleep Foundation sleep timing and variability consensus panel", "source": "Sleep Health", "year": 2021, "publicationDate": "2021-03-29", "issueDate": "2021-06", "grade": "Framework", "claim": "After retaining 22 relevant papers, the panel found no evidence supporting benefits of radical polyphasic schedules and advised against schedules that substantially reduce or fragment sleep.", "limits": "Consensus review supporting an exclusion and Observatory caution, not a regularity-training efficacy study.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sleh.2021.02.009", "sourceNote": "First online publication was 29 March 2021; volume 7, issue 3, pages 293–302 is dated June 2021." }, { "id": "EVD-CHAIR-STAND-1999", "title": "A 30-s Chair-Stand Test as a Measure of Lower Body Strength in Community-Residing Older Adults", "source": "Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport", "year": 1999, "publicationDate": "1999-06-01", "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "In 76 community-dwelling adults over 60, test–retest reliability was 0.84 for men and 0.92 for women, with correlations of 0.78 and 0.71 with weight-adjusted maximum leg press.", "limits": "Generally active older adults and a fixed chair/protocol; results do not establish universal norms or validity under altered setup.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1080/02701367.1999.10608028", "sourceNote": "Exact publisher title uses '30-s Chair-Stand Test'." }, { "id": "EVD-TUG-1991", "title": "The Timed “Up & Go”: A Test of Basic Functional Mobility for Frail Elderly Persons", "source": "Journal of the American Geriatrics Society", "year": 1991, "publicationDate": "1991-02-01", "grade": "Moderate", "claim": "In 60 geriatric day-hospital patients, the timed test showed inter- and intra-rater reliability and correlated with balance, gait speed and activities-of-daily-living measures.", "limits": "Frail older clinical sample; it is not a universal fitness test or stand-alone proof of safe independent mobility.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x", "sourceNote": "Exact publisher title includes typographic quotation marks around Up & Go." }, { "id": "EVD-GRIP-NORMS-2014", "title": "Grip Strength across the Life Course: Normative Data from Twelve British Studies", "source": "PLoS ONE", "year": 2014, "publicationDate": "2014-12-04", "grade": "Strong", "claim": "The study combined 60,803 observations from 49,964 participants aged 4 to 90 across 12 British population studies to produce grip-strength centiles.", "limits": "Cross-sectional British data; centiles are reference distributions rather than diagnoses, and protocol/device comparability must be preserved.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0113637", "sourceNote": "Exact title and sample counts verified against the publication record." }, { "id": "EVD-SPPB-1994", "title": "A Short Physical Performance Battery Assessing Lower Extremity Function: Association With Self-Reported Disability and Prediction of Mortality and Nursing Home Admission", "source": "Journal of Gerontology", "year": 1994, "publicationDate": "1994-03-01", "grade": "Strong", "claim": "In more than 5,000 adults aged 71 and older, the lower-extremity battery characterised function and added predictive information beyond self-report.", "limits": "Older-adult observational cohorts; association is not intervention efficacy and the battery does not represent every population or high-performance domain.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/49.2.M85", "sourceNote": "Exact title and publication date verified on the Oxford Academic journal record." }, { "id": "EVD-ATS-6MWT-2002", "title": "ATS Statement: Guidelines for the Six-Minute Walk Test", "source": "American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine", "year": 2002, "publicationDate": "2002-07-01", "grade": "Framework", "claim": "Provides a standardised clinical protocol for administering the six-minute walk test.", "limits": "Clinical submaximal test requiring its safety and procedural conditions; not a general unsupervised endurance challenge.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm.166.1.at1102", "sourceNote": "The ATS document is an external measurement standard, not training-program evidence." } ], "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." ], "crossCandidatePromotionCriteria": [ "All evidence URLs resolve and every ledger claim and limitation receives independent editorial verification at release time.", "Each module has a predeclared direct outcome, delayed-retention interval, novel-transfer rule, burden measure, stop rules and review window.", "Level 3 cannot be earned from self-report alone; Level 4 requires both delayed retention and predeclared transfer; Level 5 requires robust constraints plus safe explanation, independent assessment or benchmark as the module specifies.", "Not assessed remains blank and is never converted to L1 or zero.", "No candidate contributes to a global score, portfolio average or frozen Core Score.", "Safety, clinical, jurisdiction and accessibility reviews pass for every worked example and every data field.", "The Universal Module Lab rejects unsupported levels, records missing coverage and keeps candidate data separate from promoted-module exports.", "At least one adversarial test proves that each direct measure cannot be passed by lowering task quality, omitting difficult opportunities, selecting only easy items or increasing risk.", "A migration test confirms that v27 exports import without inventing assessments for any v28 candidate." ], "openEvidenceRequirements": [ { "moduleId": "MOD-FOCUS-INTERRUPTION", "requirements": [ "Add a recent field intervention with objective real-work outcomes and delayed follow-up.", "Test whether the candidate 20% operational threshold is feasible without quality loss across heterogeneous task types." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-ADHERENCE-HABIT", "requirements": [ "Add a recent synthesis separating objective completion from self-report and implementation intentions from combined interventions.", "Validate the no-streak recovery design and identify compulsivity or unsafe-adherence adverse outcomes." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-STRESS-RECOVERY", "requirements": [ "Add task-specific delayed-retention evidence and an adverse-event framework for nonclinical performance practice.", "Have a qualified clinical reviewer approve the boundary between bounded performance practice and exposure therapy." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-INFORMATION-VERIFICATION", "requirements": [ "Add independent evidence for cross-modal provenance work before synthetic image, audio or video items count toward transfer.", "Measure false distrust, compulsive checking and authorised phishing-simulation decay, not only immediate detection." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-FIRST-AID-READINESS", "requirements": [ "Resolve current 2025 ERC and AHA education standards into jurisdiction-specific routes.", "Add current evidence and recognised critical-error checklists for every non-CPR first-aid unit before scoring it." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY", "requirements": [ "Validate the Sleep Regularity Index implementation against published examples and specify the epoch, completeness and missing-data rules.", "Prove that missing nights, omitted naps or reduced sleep opportunity cannot improve the score.", "Establish an interpretable minimum-change or criterion policy before any level becomes scoreable; do not invent a universal SRI pass mark.", "Keep diary-derived results labelled self-recorded and actigraphy-derived results labelled instrumented throughout the Cockpit and exports.", "Independent sleep-clinical review must approve the insomnia, apnoea, shift-work, mania and dangerous-sleepiness routing.", "Pilot a no-wearable route and test accessibility with pain, disability, caregiving, neurodivergence and nonstandard schedules.", "Monitor daytime sleepiness, safety incidents and orthosomnia as adverse outcomes.", "Confirm that retention and transfer never require an induced sleep disruption." ] }, { "moduleId": "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY", "requirements": [ "Publish an instrument pack for every accepted test containing the exact protocol, intended population, units, contraindications, critical errors, test–retest evidence and acceptable change rule.", "Prove that equipment, chair height, assistance, course length, device substitution and practice effects cannot silently inflate a level.", "Require witnessed or independently assessed evidence for L3 and L5; self-report alone cannot pass.", "Clinical and accessibility review must cover falls, fractures, cardiac, respiratory, neurological, metabolic, autonomic, pain and wheelchair-access routes.", "Demonstrate that the module never generates exercise or rehabilitation programming.", "Validate a transfer rule that measures a second function directly and never infers global fitness.", "Resolve the family-placement question before promotion.", "Pilot across different ages and ability levels without transporting population-specific norms into unsupported groups." ] } ], "externalAnchorLedger": { "documentType": "titan-external-anchor-ledger", "schemaVersion": "28.0-candidate.3", "status": "candidate", "prepared": "2026-07-29", "verificationTaxonomy": [ "self_report", "self_recorded", "instrumented", "witnessed", "independently_assessed" ], "policy": { "purpose": "Record third-party assessments and standard instruments that may support Titan evidence without making Titan self-referential.", "nonEquivalenceRule": "An anchor supports only the named result and module criterion. It does not automatically confer a Titan level, prove the whole module or override direct, retention, transfer, burden and safety requirements.", "verificationRule": "Store the least sensitive artifact needed to verify issuer, assessment, date and result. Redact certificate numbers from public exports and never store private health data in a public record.", "promotionRule": "Every candidate anchor needs an owner, a scheduled currentness review and an explicit mapping decision before it can count toward a level.", "populationNormBoundary": "Population percentiles never confer a Titan level or badge. Instrument-specific references may be retained only as non-scoring safety, referral or criterion-selection metadata within their validated population and purpose." }, "anchors": [ { "id": "ANCHOR-CEFR-INDEPENDENT-EXAM", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-LEARNING-TRANSFER" ], "authority": "Council of Europe CEFR plus the independent examination provider", "assessment": "A component-scored language examination whose provider publishes a transparent procedure for relating the examination to CEFR levels A1-C2. A CEFR self-assessment grid is not an independently assessed result.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy the direct external-assessment component when the achieved level and tested skills match the predeclared Titan criterion." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "An examination alone cannot establish retained performance after disuse, untrained-domain transfer, sustained use or teaching capability." } }, "jurisdiction": "International framework; provider and recognition are jurisdiction-specific.", "expiryRecency": "The CEFR framework has no universal certificate-expiry rule. Record the test date and provider policy; Titan must require current-use or retest evidence when the result is too old for the claimed current capability.", "verificationMethod": "Verify the certificate or statement of results through the issuing examination provider, including level, skill components, date and candidate identity; record the provider’s published CEFR-linking method.", "limitations": "The Council of Europe defines six levels and descriptors but explicitly does not verify or validate the quality of an examination provider’s claimed CEFR linkage. Provider quality and skill coverage therefore require separate approval.", "url": "https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/relating-examinations-to-the-cefr", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-AHA-FIRST-AID-CPR-AED-ECARD", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FIRST-AID-READINESS" ], "authority": "American Heart Association authorized Training Center", "assessment": "Successful completion of an appropriate AHA ECC course, such as Heartsaver First Aid CPR AED, evidenced by an issuer-controlled course-completion eCard.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "A current verified provider card may satisfy the external certification component for the skills and population explicitly covered by that course; Titan still requires the candidate module’s direct scenario or manikin criterion." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "A provider course card alone is not an instructor credential and does not prove sustained readiness, scenario breadth or teaching performance." } }, "jurisdiction": "AHA Training Centers in the United States and participating international programs; workplace and legal acceptance remains local.", "expiryRecency": "AHA course-completion cards are valid for two years through the end of the issue month.", "verificationMethod": "Enter the eCard code or scan its QR code on the AHA My Cards verification service; printed cards may also be checked with the issuing Training Center.", "limitations": "The card proves successful completion of the named course, not current real-emergency performance. Skill decay, course scope, local first-aid rules and recertification requirements remain relevant.", "url": "https://cpr.heart.org/en/resources/course-card-information", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-DVSA-CAR-HAZARD-PERCEPTION", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE" ], "authority": "Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency via the official Great Britain car theory test", "assessment": "The hazard-perception component of the official car theory test, scored out of 75 with a current pass mark of 44. The full theory test is passed only when both the multiple-choice and hazard-perception parts are passed.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy the direct external-assessment component of EX-HAZARD-PERCEPTION when the official result records at least the current hazard-perception pass mark." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "The score does not establish delayed retention, cross-jurisdiction transfer, real-road safety, crash reduction or fitness to drive." } }, "jurisdiction": "Great Britain; Northern Ireland and other jurisdictions use different authorities and rules.", "expiryRecency": "The official theory-test pass certificate number lasts two years for booking and taking the practical driving test. Record the test date and the contemporaneous pass threshold.", "verificationMethod": "Witness or retain a redacted copy of the official result letter showing the hazard-perception score and test date. Treat the pass-certificate number as sensitive and do not publish it.", "limitations": "This is an external screen-based driving assessment, not evidence of on-road safety, eyesight, licensing status or general sensorimotor capacity. The pass mark and process can change and require a release-currentness check.", "url": "https://www.gov.uk/theory-test/pass-mark-and-result", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-CDC-STEADI-CHAIR-STAND-30S", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY", "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE" ], "authority": "US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention STEADI", "assessment": "Thirty-second Chair Stand using a straight-backed 17-inch chair without armrests and a stopwatch, with the number of full stands scored under the published protocol.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "witnessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May supply a witnessed direct result only when the candidate module’s age-appropriate criterion, support conditions and professional gate were predeclared." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "One chair-stand result cannot establish broad physical capacity, retained change, transfer or teaching competence." } }, "jurisdiction": "United States clinical fall-risk resource; use elsewhere requires local clinical interpretation.", "expiryRecency": "No certificate or issuer expiry. Record assessment date, time, chair height, footwear, assistance and symptoms; repeat only on the approved clinical schedule.", "verificationMethod": "A trained witness follows the CDC sheet, stays next to the participant for safety and signs the dated score record. Video is optional only with informed consent and secure handling.", "limitations": "CDC presents this as a test of leg strength and endurance within older-adult fall-risk assessment. It is not a diagnosis, universal fitness norm or unsupervised challenge; the sheet directs the assessor to stay next to the patient.", "url": "https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/media/pdfs/STEADI-Assessment-30Sec-508.pdf", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-CDC-STEADI-TUG", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY", "MOD-SENSORIMOTOR-RESILIENCE" ], "authority": "US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention STEADI", "assessment": "Timed Up & Go using a standard armchair, a marked line three metres or ten feet away, regular footwear and the participant’s usual walking aid when needed; time stops after the participant sits again.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "witnessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May supply a witnessed direct mobility result only within the candidate module’s professional gate and predeclared safety conditions." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "A TUG time alone cannot establish broad functional capacity, improvement, retention, transfer or readiness for unsupervised mobility work." } }, "jurisdiction": "United States clinical fall-risk resource; use elsewhere requires local clinical interpretation.", "expiryRecency": "No certificate or issuer expiry. Record date, conditions, walking aid, symptoms and observations; reassessment interval belongs to the clinician-approved plan.", "verificationMethod": "A trained witness follows the CDC protocol, remains beside the participant for safety and signs the dated time-and-observation record.", "limitations": "CDC states that an older adult taking at least twelve seconds is at risk for falling. This threshold is a screening signal, not a diagnosis or general fitness grade, and neurological or gait observations can require further evaluation.", "url": "https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/media/pdfs/STEADI-Assessment-TUG-508.pdf", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-CONSENSUS-SLEEP-DIARY-CORE", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY" ], "authority": "Consensus Sleep Diary expert group; published in SLEEP", "assessment": "The Core Consensus Sleep Diary, a standardized prospective self-monitoring instrument from which declared timing, continuity and sleep-efficiency measures can be derived.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "self_recorded", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May supply the candidate module’s structured direct record when completion rules, scoring formula, minimum valid nights and missing-data rules are predeclared." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "A diary alone is self-recorded and cannot establish independent verification, clinical diagnosis or durable performance across disruptions." } }, "jurisdiction": "International research and clinical instrument; language version and local clinical use vary.", "expiryRecency": "No certificate expiry. Record a dated contiguous window; the candidate module must predeclare the minimum valid-night count and cannot recycle an old window as current evidence.", "verificationMethod": "Retain a dated diary export or redacted sheet with item completeness and formula checks. Independent witnessing is optional and must not expose unnecessary health information.", "limitations": "The publication describes an expert-consensus, patient-informed standardized diary and explicitly calls it a living document needing further testing, refinement and validation. It is not a sleep-disorder diagnosis or an objective sleep measure.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5665/sleep.1642", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-AASM-CLINICAL-ACTIGRAPHY", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SLEEP-REGULARITY" ], "authority": "American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline", "assessment": "Clinician-directed actigraphy used to estimate sleep parameters under an applicable AASM recommendation, with the device, algorithm, wear interval and diary pairing documented.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "instrumented", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May support an instrumented direct result only when actigraphy is clinically appropriate and interpreted under a qualified clinician’s plan. Consumer-device output alone does not meet this anchor." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Actigraphy alone does not establish sleep quality, diagnosis, behavioural causation, sustained transfer or teaching capability." } }, "jurisdiction": "Clinical guideline from the United States; device approval and practice requirements vary by jurisdiction.", "expiryRecency": "No certificate expiry. Preserve the exact observation interval, device and scoring algorithm; a later claim requires a new representative interval under the clinical plan.", "verificationMethod": "Use the clinician’s dated report or a redacted device export reconciled to the prescribed wear and diary protocol; retain device and algorithm metadata.", "limitations": "The AASM recommendations are for clinicians evaluating suspected or diagnosed sleep or circadian disorders and are mostly conditional. The guideline applies to FDA-approved devices and does not make a general consumer-wearable or self-diagnosis claim.", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.7230", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-METACULUS-RESOLVED-TRACK-RECORD", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FORECASTING" ], "authority": "Metaculus", "assessment": "A public or independently verified user track record computed from quantified forecasts after questions resolve, using the platform’s current Baseline, Peer or tournament scoring method.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy an external forecasting-performance component once Titan predeclares a minimum resolved-question count, valid-question rules, comparison baseline and scoring window." }, "L5": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May contribute only when a substantial, recent, cross-topic record meets a predeclared criterion and Titan separately verifies retention, process quality, update discipline and teaching or review capability." } }, "jurisdiction": "International online platform; access, identity and question availability are platform-dependent.", "expiryRecency": "The platform has no credential expiry. Record the export date, scoring version, number and type of resolved questions and most recent resolution; Titan must set the recency and sample thresholds before promotion.", "verificationMethod": "Verify the public profile or platform export, resolved-question count and score fields. Preserve a dated, tamper-evident export because scoring systems and displayed fields can change.", "limitations": "Metaculus states that scores measure performance over many predictions and currently uses Baseline and Peer scores, with Relative scores retained for tournaments. Scores depend on question mix, participation and the active scoring method; a rank or medal alone is insufficient.", "url": "https://www.metaculus.com/faq/", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-SERVSAFE-FOOD-PROTECTION-MANAGER", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR" ], "authority": "National Restaurant Association Educational Foundation ServSafe; ANAB-Conference for Food Protection accredited examination", "assessment": "ServSafe Food Protection Manager Certification earned through the proctored accredited examination and verified through the issuer’s certificate service.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Counts only as external evidence for the culinary exemplar’s food-safety prerequisite; it does not satisfy the direct making-skill criterion." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Food-safety certification alone does not prove practical culinary quality, retained technique, transfer, commercial authorization or teaching performance." } }, "jurisdiction": "United States; acceptance and renewal requirements vary by state, locality and employer.", "expiryRecency": "Verify the certificate’s current validity and the applicable local regulatory requirement at assessment time; do not apply a universal Titan expiry where the issuer or jurisdiction differs.", "verificationMethod": "Use the ServSafe Validate a Certificate service or issuer account record and record certificate type, issue date, current validity and jurisdiction without publishing the full credential number.", "limitations": "The official program states that the Manager examination is ANAB-CFP accredited and nationally accepted, but a knowledge certification is not a witnessed knife, heat, allergen-control, fold-quality or kitchen-workflow assessment.", "url": "https://www.servsafe.com/ServSafe-Manager", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-NNAS-BRONZE", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION" ], "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme approved provider", "assessment": "Bronze National Navigation Award, verified through the approved provider and restricted to the named outdoor-navigation outcomes.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy the direct external-assessment component when the terrain, route and skills match the predeclared Titan criterion; Titan still requires its own currentness and retained/novel-route evidence." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "The award alone does not establish sustained performance across Titan constraints, device-free transfer, teaching or current capability." } }, "jurisdiction": "United Kingdom delivery through approved providers; recognition and terrain context remain provider- and jurisdiction-specific.", "expiryRecency": "The award has no universal Titan currentness period. Record assessment date and require current retained/transfer evidence for a current Titan claim.", "verificationMethod": "Verify provider approval, participant result, award level and assessment date with the issuing provider while withholding unnecessary certificate identifiers.", "limitations": "This is outdoor land-navigation evidence, not proof of all Spatial Simulation & Cognitive Maps outcomes, urban mobility, traffic safety, wilderness leadership or independent travel without appropriate aids.", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/bronze-national-navigation-award/", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-NNAS-SILVER", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION" ], "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme approved provider", "assessment": "Silver Navigator Award, verified through the approved provider and restricted to the named outdoor-navigation outcomes.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy a matching direct external-assessment component; the achieved award does not waive Titan retention, transfer, burden or safety evidence." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "The award alone does not establish Titan robustness across constraints, teaching or current performance." } }, "jurisdiction": "United Kingdom delivery through approved providers; recognition and terrain context remain provider- and jurisdiction-specific.", "expiryRecency": "Record the assessment date and require current retained/transfer evidence for a current Titan claim.", "verificationMethod": "Verify provider approval, participant result, award level and date with the issuing provider and store only the minimum credential data.", "limitations": "More advanced award content does not convert the credential into a general Spatial Simulation & Cognitive Maps level or replace safe, predeclared novel-route testing.", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/silver-navigator-award/", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-NNAS-GOLD", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-SPATIAL-SIMULATION" ], "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme approved provider", "assessment": "Gold Navigator Award, verified through the approved provider and restricted to the named advanced outdoor-navigation outcomes.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": true, "rule": "May satisfy a matching direct external-assessment component while Titan separately requires currentness, retention and the declared transfer evidence." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Gold is not automatic Titan L5; the award alone does not establish Titan-wide robustness, independent teaching evidence or current performance across declared constraints." } }, "jurisdiction": "United Kingdom delivery through approved providers; recognition and terrain context remain provider- and jurisdiction-specific.", "expiryRecency": "Record the assessment date and require current retained/transfer evidence for a current Titan claim.", "verificationMethod": "Verify provider approval, participant result, award level and date with the issuing provider and retain only necessary credential data.", "limitations": "The award does not establish every spatial task, universal wilderness competence, leadership qualification or safe navigation without required equipment and local judgment.", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/gold-national-navigation-award/", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-SWIM-ENGLAND-ADULT-DISTANCE", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-FUNCTIONAL-PHYSICAL-CAPACITY" ], "authority": "Swim England programme provider", "assessment": "A named Adult Distance Award witnessed and recorded through a Swim England programme provider.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "witnessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Counts only as evidence of the exact witnessed distance under recorded conditions; it does not satisfy Functional Physical Capacity or another Titan module criterion by itself." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "A distance award does not prove retained stroke quality, open-water competence, rescue skill, safety judgment, transfer or general physical capacity." } }, "jurisdiction": "England; delivery and recognition are programme-specific.", "expiryRecency": "Record the date, pool conditions, stroke and distance. A historical award is not current swimming evidence without a safe current reassessment.", "verificationMethod": "Verify the award level and date with the provider and record the exact witnessed outcome without retaining unnecessary personal identifiers.", "limitations": "Adult awards may be flexibly delivered. Do not infer technique, deep-water safety, rescue capability, open-water competence or a general fitness level.", "url": "https://www.swimming.org/learntoswim/swim-england-adult-distance-awards/", "status": "candidate" }, { "id": "ANCHOR-RSPH-LEVEL2-FOOD-SAFETY", "moduleIds": [ "MOD-TOOL-REPAIR" ], "authority": "Royal Society for Public Health approved centre", "assessment": "RSPH Level 2 Award in Food Safety and Hygiene, verified through the issuing centre or awarding body.", "evidenceModeMinimum": "independently_assessed", "countsForLevel": { "L3": { "eligible": false, "rule": "Counts only as external evidence for the culinary exemplar's food-safety knowledge prerequisite; it does not satisfy the practical making criterion." }, "L5": { "eligible": false, "rule": "The qualification does not prove practical cooking quality, retained knife skill, transfer, kitchen execution, legal authorization or teaching performance." } }, "jurisdiction": "Regulated qualification in England and Northern Ireland; workplace and food-law requirements vary by jurisdiction and role.", "expiryRecency": "Verify current issuer status and any employer or jurisdiction-specific refresher requirement. Titan does not invent a universal expiry.", "verificationMethod": "Verify qualification title, awarding body, result and date through the issuer or centre while redacting full credential identifiers from public exports.", "limitations": "The assessment is knowledge-based. UK government guidance requires appropriate training and supervision but does not universally require every food handler to hold a certificate.", "url": "https://www.rsph.org.uk/qualifications-training/qualifications/rsph-level-2-award-in-food-safety-and-hygiene-37490/", "status": "candidate" } ], "sourceVerification": [ { "id": "SRC-COE-CEFR-LEVELS", "authority": "Council of Europe", "title": "The CEFR Levels", "url": "https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions", "verifiedFacts": "CEFR defines six levels A1-C2 using can-do descriptors; its self-assessment grid is an orientation tool." }, { "id": "SRC-COE-CEFR-EXAMS", "authority": "Council of Europe", "title": "Relating Language Examinations to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFR). A Manual", "url": "https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference-languages/relating-examinations-to-the-cefr", "verifiedFacts": "The manual supports transparent exam-linking procedures, but the Council of Europe states that it does not verify or validate the quality of a provider’s claimed CEFR linkage." }, { "id": "SRC-AHA-COURSE-CARDS", "authority": "American Heart Association", "title": "Course Card Information", "url": "https://cpr.heart.org/en/resources/course-card-information", "verifiedFacts": "Authorized Training Centers issue cards after successful course completion; eCards can be verified by code or QR; cards are valid for two years through the end of the issue month." }, { "id": "SRC-DVSA-THEORY-RESULT", "authority": "GOV.UK / Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency", "title": "Theory test: cars — Pass mark and test result", "url": "https://www.gov.uk/theory-test/pass-mark-and-result", "verifiedFacts": "The car hazard-perception pass mark is 44 of 75; both theory-test parts must be passed; the pass certificate number lasts two years." }, { "id": "SRC-CDC-CHAIR-STAND", "authority": "US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention", "title": "Assessment 30-second Chair Stand", "url": "https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/media/pdfs/STEADI-Assessment-30Sec-508.pdf", "verifiedFacts": "The sheet specifies a 17-inch armless chair, a thirty-second count and assessor proximity for safety; below-average age- and sex-referenced scores indicate fall risk." }, { "id": "SRC-CDC-TUG", "authority": "US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention", "title": "Assessment Timed Up & Go (TUG)", "url": "https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/media/pdfs/STEADI-Assessment-TUG-508.pdf", "verifiedFacts": "The protocol uses a standard armchair, three-metre route and stopwatch; assessor stays beside the patient; at least twelve seconds signals fall risk in an older adult." }, { "id": "SRC-CONSENSUS-SLEEP-DIARY", "authority": "SLEEP", "title": "The Consensus Sleep Diary: Standardizing Prospective Sleep Self-Monitoring", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5665/sleep.1642", "verifiedFacts": "The 2012 publication presents an expert-consensus, standardized, patient-informed Core sleep diary and describes it as a living document needing further testing, refinement and validation." }, { "id": "SRC-AASM-ACTIGRAPHY", "authority": "American Academy of Sleep Medicine", "title": "Use of Actigraphy for the Evaluation of Sleep Disorders and Circadian Rhythm Sleep-Wake Disorders: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Clinical Practice Guideline", "url": "https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.7230", "verifiedFacts": "The 2018 guideline gives clinician-facing recommendations for suspected or diagnosed sleep and circadian disorders, largely conditional, and states that the recommendations apply to FDA-approved devices." }, { "id": "SRC-METACULUS-SCORES", "authority": "Metaculus", "title": "Metaculus FAQ", "url": "https://www.metaculus.com/faq/", "verifiedFacts": "Scores are issued after questions resolve and measure performance over many predictions; the current FAQ describes Baseline and Peer scores and Relative tournament scores." }, { "id": "SRC-SERVSAFE-MANAGER", "authority": "ServSafe", "title": "ServSafe Manager", "url": "https://www.servsafe.com/ServSafe-Manager", "verifiedFacts": "The official page says students can earn the ServSafe Food Protection Manager Certification through an ANAB-CFP-accredited examination and provides a certificate-validation service." }, { "id": "SRC-NNAS-BRONZE", "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme", "title": "Bronze National Navigation Award", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/bronze-national-navigation-award/", "verifiedFacts": "The personal-performance award is delivered through approved providers and assesses basic map, route, symbol, distance, direction and relocation skills on defined outdoor terrain." }, { "id": "SRC-NNAS-SILVER", "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme", "title": "Silver Navigator Award", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/silver-navigator-award/", "verifiedFacts": "The award extends outdoor navigation to more demanding terrain, route choice, relocation and navigation strategy through approved-provider assessment." }, { "id": "SRC-NNAS-GOLD", "authority": "National Navigation Award Scheme", "title": "Gold Navigator Award", "url": "https://nnas.org.uk/navigator-award/gold-national-navigation-award/", "verifiedFacts": "The award assesses advanced navigation planning, execution, relocation and decision-making in demanding terrain through approved providers." }, { "id": "SRC-SWIM-ENGLAND-ADULT-DISTANCE", "authority": "Swim England", "title": "Swim England Adult Distance Awards", "url": "https://www.swimming.org/learntoswim/swim-england-adult-distance-awards/", "verifiedFacts": "Adult distance awards record completion of named swimming distances. They do not by themselves establish stroke quality, open-water competence, rescue skill or general physical capacity." }, { "id": "SRC-RSPH-LEVEL2-FOOD-SAFETY", "authority": "Royal Society for Public Health", "title": "RSPH Level 2 Award in Food Safety and Hygiene", "url": "https://www.rsph.org.uk/qualifications-training/qualifications/rsph-level-2-award-in-food-safety-and-hygiene-37490/", "verifiedFacts": "The regulated qualification is assessed through a multiple-choice examination and supports food-safety knowledge; it does not directly assess practical cooking, knife skill or kitchen execution." } ] } }