Section 112 of 440

APPENDIX AA: CANDIDATE LAB AND RESEARCH OBSERVATORY

Candidate Lab

Candidate status

This is a design standard for seven possible future modules. They are not promoted, not scoreable and not available for assessment. Evidence grades are provisional and thresholds are testable operational defaults, not established population norms.

Do not record a Titan level from this document. Do not add candidate results to a portfolio average, Core profile or operational Capability result.

Frozen Core and operational boundary

Candidate architecture

Promotion of all seven would produce 8 families and 23 modules. Until then, the operational architecture remains 7 families and 16 modules.

Cross-candidate promotion criteria

• Before promotion, every evidence link, claim and limitation must receive documented review by appropriately qualified independent reviewers; changed evidence requires a new review.
• 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, Core profile or operational Capability result.
• 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 older operational exports import without inventing assessments for any candidate.

Candidate definitions

Focus & Interruption Management

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Choose one meaningful, non-safety-critical task and define a correct unit of work.
2. List interrupt sources and classify each as critical, time-bounded or deferrable; critical alerts always remain available.
3. Run at least three baseline sessions with a fixed task window and a declared interruption script.
4. 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.
5. Run at least three matched comparison sessions and record time, errors, completed units, resumption lag and burden.
6. Keep, adapt or retire the intervention based on the primary outcome, quality floor and burden rather than subjective busyness.
7. Repeat after at least seven days without live coaching, then run the predeclared transfer task.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-INTERRUPTED-WORK-2008 - The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress: 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.
• EVD-RESUMPTION-CUES-2003 - Preparing to resume an interrupted task: effects of prospective goal encoding and retrospective rehearsal: Artificial dynamic task and controlled interruption timing; does not establish transfer to all work, treatment of ADHD or a durable general attention change.
• EVD-TASK-SWITCHING-2001 - Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching: Laboratory classification and arithmetic tasks; establishes a switch-cost phenomenon, not the effectiveness of a specific workplace routine or general executive-function training.

Adherence & Habit Formation

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Select one small, low-risk behaviour and define what counts, what does not count and when an opportunity is ineligible.
2. Record a baseline using an external trace where practical; do not reconstruct missed days from memory.
3. Write one if-then plan linked to an observable cue and identify the most likely obstacle.
4. Reduce friction for the desired action, increase friction for the competing action and create a minimum viable version for low-capacity days.
5. Track completions, eligible opportunities, misses, recovery time and burden without streak punishment.
6. After the supported phase, reduce prompts to the predeclared maintenance level and run the delayed test.
7. Apply the same design process to the predeclared second low-risk behaviour for transfer.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-IMPLEMENTATION-INTENTIONS-2006 - Implementation Intentions and Goal Achievement: A Meta‐analysis of Effects and Processes: 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.
• EVD-MCII-2021 - A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Mental Contrasting With Implementation Intentions on Goal Attainment: This is a combined intervention rather than implementation intentions alone; intervention style moderated results and publication bias may make the true effect smaller.
• EVD-HABIT-FORMATION-2010 - How are habits formed: Modelling habit formation in the real world: 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.

Stress Recovery & Performance Under Pressure

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Select one nonclinical performance task and obtain explicit consent for a bounded, reversible stressor.
2. Record rested task performance, a personal recovery band, current readiness and all stop conditions.
3. Run one baseline stressor session at the lowest meaningful intensity and record performance, recovery and delayed burden.
4. Choose one narrow strategy: stress-arousal reappraisal, a rehearsed pre-performance plan, or optional paced-breathing/HRV biofeedback within medical and device constraints.
5. Practise only at a tolerable dose; increase complexity only when the prior dose caused no concerning immediate or delayed response.
6. Repeat the matched direct test, then complete delayed retention and the predeclared equally safe transfer context.
7. Route clinical anxiety, trauma, panic, dissociation, severe autonomic symptoms or functional deterioration to qualified care.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-META-2024 - Effectiveness of stress arousal reappraisal and stress-is-enhancing mindset interventions on task performance outcomes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials: 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.
• EVD-STRESS-REAPPRAISAL-GRE-2010 - Turning the knots in your stomach into bows: Reappraising arousal improves performance on the GRE: Narrow test-performance setting and limited sample; does not establish universal academic improvement, anxiety treatment or safe self-directed clinical exposure.
• EVD-HRV-BIOFEEDBACK-2017 - The effect of heart rate variability biofeedback training on stress and anxiety: a meta-analysis: 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.
• EVD-NICE-SOCIAL-ANXIETY-2024 - Social anxiety disorder: recognition, assessment and treatment: 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.

Information Verification, Provenance & Manipulation Resistance

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Define the item class, decision stakes, balanced answer key and permitted verification tools before testing.
2. Record a blinded baseline on unfamiliar items and separate source credibility from claim accuracy.
3. Train a compact workflow: pause; identify the original source; read laterally; seek independent corroboration; inspect provenance or metadata where appropriate; and state residual uncertainty.
4. Practise recognising bounded manipulation techniques without using a single visual cue or brand as proof.
5. Use only inert, authorised phishing simulations; never open live suspicious attachments, run unknown code or submit credentials.
6. Retest on a nonrepeating balanced set after the delay, then run the predeclared cross-modality or cross-threat transfer.
7. Escalate medical, legal, financial, safety, identity and high-impact decisions to qualified or authoritative verification.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-LATERAL-READING-2019 - Improving university students’ web savvy: An intervention study: Educational tasks and student population; no proof of durable cross-domain scam resistance, synthetic-media detection or correct judgement in every live case.
• EVD-LATERAL-READING-FIELD-2022 - Lateral reading on the open Internet: A district-wide field study in high school government classes: High-school government-course context with teacher professional development; transfer to adults, other domains, high-stakes decisions and long retention requires direct testing.
• EVD-INOCULATION-LONGITUDINAL-2021 - Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments: 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.
• EVD-PHISHING-RETENTION-2007 - Getting users to pay attention to anti-phishing education: evaluation of retention and transfer: 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.

First-Aid & Emergency Readiness

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. 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.
2. Record local emergency numbers, dispatcher role, consent boundaries and current recognised guidance.
3. Complete training through a recognised provider or qualified instructor using manikins, AED trainers and inert equipment.
4. Run an immediate independent or instrumented assessment and record every critical error, not only a total score.
5. Schedule brief refreshers and an uncoached 90-day retention assessment; mark the Titan level historical if the review window or certification expires.
6. Run one unfamiliar standards-concordant simulation for transfer, including activation of emergency services and safe scene assessment.
7. In any real emergency, contact the local emergency service promptly and follow dispatcher and qualified-responder instructions.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-AHA-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2025 - Part 12: Resuscitation Education Science: 2025 American Heart Association Guidelines for Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care: Clinical guideline and US framework; it does not make Titan a training provider, establish certification or guarantee real-event survival from a simulator score.
• EVD-CPR-FEEDBACK-RETENTION-2021 - Cardiopulmonary resuscitation skill training and retention in teens (CPR START): A randomized control trial in high school students: 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.
• EVD-ERC-RESUSCITATION-EDUCATION-2021 - European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: Education for resuscitation: European framework whose requirements must be checked against the current local 2025 guidance and recognised provider; not a Titan certification standard by itself.
• EVD-ERC-FIRST-AID-2021 - European Resuscitation Council Guidelines 2021: First aid: 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.

Sleep Regularity & Recovery

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Screen for dangerous daytime sleepiness, persistent insomnia symptoms, suspected apnoea, shift-related impairment, recent mania or another condition requiring professional assessment.
2. Choose one personally feasible schedule and one primary regularity metric; record whether evidence is self-recorded or instrumented.
3. 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.
4. Predeclare the regularity target, valid-day and missing-data rules, sleep-opportunity floor, daytime-safety indicators and stop conditions.
5. 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.
6. Run two comparison windows and retain, adapt or stop the support based on regularity, preserved sleep opportunity, daytime function and burden.
7. Repeat the 30-day delayed window and wait for a naturally occurring safe schedule change before attempting the transfer test.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INDEX-2017 - Irregular sleep/wake patterns are associated with poorer academic performance and delayed circadian and sleep/wake timing: Observational, small and undergraduate-specific; it cannot establish causality. The study used sleep diaries, so those SRI data were self-recorded rather than objective.
• EVD-CONSENSUS-SLEEP-DIARY-2012 - The Consensus Sleep Diary: Standardizing Prospective Sleep Self-Monitoring: The publication calls the diary a living document requiring further testing and validation. Diary variables, including diary-derived sleep efficiency, remain self-recorded.
• EVD-SLEEP-REGULARITY-INTERVENTION-2026 - Effects of a single session intervention on actigraphy-measured sleep for adolescents with insufficient and irregular sleep: A randomized controlled trial: Small sample aged 13–15, clinician session, secondary outcomes and short follow-up; total sleep time did not significantly change.
• EVD-AASM-INSOMNIA-GUIDELINE-2021 - Behavioral and psychological treatments for chronic insomnia disorder in adults: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline: Clinical guideline for adults with chronic insomnia, not evidence that a consumer regularity protocol treats insomnia.
• EVD-SLEEP-DURATION-CONSENSUS-2015 - Recommended Amount of Sleep for a Healthy Adult: A Joint Consensus Statement of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine and Sleep Research Society: Population-level guidance for healthy adults, not an individual prescription and not a regularity intervention.
• EVD-POLYPHASIC-SLEEP-CONSENSUS-2021 - Adverse impact of polyphasic sleep patterns in humans: Report of the National Sleep Foundation sleep timing and variability consensus panel: Consensus review supporting an exclusion and Observatory caution, not a regularity-training efficacy study.

Functional Physical Capacity

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

Decision rules

• 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

1. Define the functional question and select one validated measure appropriate to the person’s age, condition, access needs and risk.
2. Obtain professional clearance when fall, fracture, cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, metabolic, autonomic, pregnancy-related, postsurgical or significant pain risk is present.
3. Lock the published protocol, equipment, environment, assistance, assistive device, assessor and stop rules before testing.
4. Run a safe familiarisation if the published protocol permits it, then collect the witnessed or instrumented baseline and every symptom or critical error.
5. If the person undertakes training or rehabilitation, that plan remains separately governed by the appropriate professional; Titan records outcomes only.
6. Retest with the identical protocol, then complete the delayed retest.
7. Use a separately approved related measure for transfer and report agreement or disagreement rather than manufacturing a combined score.

Candidate anchors

Guardrails

Promotion gates

• 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.

Evidence

• EVD-CHAIR-STAND-1999 - A 30-s Chair-Stand Test as a Measure of Lower Body Strength in Community-Residing Older Adults: Generally active older adults and a fixed chair/protocol; results do not establish universal norms or validity under altered setup.
• EVD-TUG-1991 - The Timed “Up & Go”: A Test of Basic Functional Mobility for Frail Elderly Persons: Frail older clinical sample; it is not a universal fitness test or stand-alone proof of safe independent mobility.
• EVD-GRIP-NORMS-2014 - Grip Strength across the Life Course: Normative Data from Twelve British Studies: Cross-sectional British data; centiles are reference distributions rather than diagnoses, and protocol/device comparability must be preserved.
• EVD-SPPB-1994 - A Short Physical Performance Battery Assessing Lower Extremity Function: Association With Self-Reported Disability and Prediction of Mortality and Nursing Home Admission: Older-adult observational cohorts; association is not intervention efficacy and the battery does not represent every population or high-performance domain.
• EVD-ATS-6MWT-2002 - ATS Statement: Guidelines for the Six-Minute Walk Test: Clinical submaximal test requiring its safety and procedural conditions; not a general unsupervised endurance challenge.

Hybrid Transactive Memory

Why this is a candidate rather than a module. Groups have long been shown to develop a shared directory of who knows what. When part of that directory is an AI system, three things change at once: the directory entry may be wrong without anyone noticing, the system may generate a plausible answer instead of reporting that it does not know, and the person may lose the ability to answer unaided. Existing modules cover fragments of this — team orchestration, prospective memory, human-AI complementarity — but none measures the allocation itself.

Measures. Directory accuracy, meaning whether the person correctly predicts what the system and the teammates actually know. Retrieval latency and accuracy. Source attribution, scored separately from content accuracy. False-memory propagation, meaning the rate at which a system-supplied error is later reported as personal knowledge. Recovery when the system is unavailable. Unaided recall, retested under D4.

Promotion blockers. A controlled comparison against unaided individuals, conventional notes and retrieval-only systems. Delayed retention. Evidence that directory accuracy improves with training rather than only with exposure. A privacy-burden account. Evidence that the measure cannot be passed by delegating everything and reporting confidence. Evidence grade: Emerging for the group-level phenomenon; Insufficient for operational promotion.

Boundary. This record makes no claim that offloading memory to a system improves capability. Deskilling is a declared risk of the candidate, not an objection to be answered later, and any promotion route must measure it directly.

Selective Muscle-Compartment Recruitment

Position, corrected after source verification. The supporting study compared 16 people with chronic ankle instability against 16 without, measuring fibularis longus compartment activation during eversion in neutral and plantar-flexed positions at 30 and 70 per cent of maximum voluntary contraction, with and without visual feedback on the spatial electromyographic distribution. With feedback in the plantar-flexed position, posterior-compartment activation in the ankle-instability group reached the level seen in the comparison group. The authors state that long-term efficacy for improving motor function requires longitudinal investigation.

Population note. The evidence comes from a clinical population under investigation for a specific instability, not from general-population training. That is a further reason the exclusion gates below are strict rather than cautious boilerplate.

What this is not. This was a single-session, within-visit comparison, not a training study. It shows that feedback can change which part of a muscle is recruited during a measured contraction while the feedback is present. It does not show that the change is learned, that it persists once the feedback is removed, or that it improves ankle function. The candidate is therefore admitted at a lower grade than the frontier register originally proposed, and the trainability question is the whole of what remains to be answered.

Safety gate. This candidate sits close to clinical rehabilitation and is not a general-population training route. It is excluded where there is current injury, post-surgical status, neurological condition, pain on the target movement, or any instruction from a treating professional. Where a person is under care for the relevant structure, the candidate is not run outside that care. Skin condition, electrode sensitivity and device instructions are hard constraints. Stop for new or increased pain, numbness, weakness or skin reaction.

Promotion blockers. Retention after feedback is withdrawn. Transfer to an untrained movement. Evidence that changed recruitment produces a functional benefit rather than only a changed signal. An accessible-equivalent route for people without access to the instrumentation. Independent replication. Evidence grade: Emerging for feedback-present recruitment change in the studied clinical population; Insufficient for trainability, retention, transfer, or any functional or clinical claim. Source: Mendez-Rebolledo G, Calatayud J, Martinez-Valdes E. Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2025;57(1):1-10. DOI: 10.1249/MSS.0000000000003537

Neuromotor Interface Fluency

Position. Non-invasive wrist-worn neuromuscular interfaces have been reported to support continuous control, gesture input and handwriting, including for users the decoder had not seen before, with performance improving alongside coaching and familiarity. That last point is precisely what makes this a capability question rather than a hardware question.

Measurement rule, and the reason this record exists. Improvement in a person-device system has at least four sources: the person learns, the decoder is retrained, the decoder is personalised, and the two adapt to one another. Titan must not credit a software release to human training. Any declaration under this record must freeze the decoder version and state whether personalisation occurred between baseline and retest. A retest against a changed decoder is not a retest.

Promotion blockers. Session-to-session retention with a frozen decoder. Cross-device or cross-placement transfer. Fatigue and error-recovery behaviour. Performance under posture change. An accessibility account, since a wrist-worn interface is not equally available to all users. Long-term skin and comfort safety. Evidence grade: Emerging for acquired fluency; Insufficient for promotion.

Open evidence requirements

Focus & Interruption Management

• 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.

Adherence & Habit Formation

• 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.

Stress Recovery & Performance Under Pressure

• 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.

Information Verification, Provenance & Manipulation Resistance

• 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.

First-Aid & Emergency Readiness

• 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.

Sleep Regularity & Recovery

• 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.

Functional Physical Capacity

• 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.

Promotion decision

Promotion is a governance act, not a formatting change. It requires verified evidence, completed safety and accessibility reviews, validated data fields, adversarial metric tests, migration tests and a new operational registry release. Partial promotion is allowed.