Changes for page Governance

Summary

• Page properties (2 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Parent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-Archive.FactHarbor 0\.9\.40.Organisation.WebHome
	1	+FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor 0\.9\.40.Organisation.WebHome

Content

...	...	@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
4	4
5	5	== 1. Governance Structure ==
6	6
7		-{{include reference="Archive.FactHarbor.Organisation.Diagrams.Governance Structure.WebHome"/}}
	7	+{{include reference="FactHarbor.Organisation.Diagrams.Governance Structure.WebHome"/}}
8	8
9	9	* **Governing Team** – Sets high-level policy, organizational direction, funding priorities
10	10	* **Lead** – Coordinates execution, represents organization publicly
...	...	@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
12	12	* **Domain Experts** – Subject-matter authority in specialized areas
13	13	* **Community Contributors** – Feedback, proposals, and participation in decision-making
14	14
	15	+
15	15	== 2. Decision-Making Levels ==
16	16
17	17	=== 2.1 Technical Decisions (Maintainers) ===
...	...	@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@
19	19	**Scope**: Architecture, data model, AKEL configuration, quality gates, system performance
20	20
21	21	**Process**:
22		-
23	23	* Proposals discussed in technical forums
24	24	* Review by core maintainers
25	25	* Consensus-based approval
...	...	@@ -27,7 +27,6 @@
27	27	* Quality gate adjustments require rationale and audit validation
28	28
29	29	**Examples**:
30		-
31	31	* Adding new quality gate
32	32	* Adjusting AKEL parameters
33	33	* Modifying audit sampling algorithms
...	...	@@ -38,7 +38,6 @@
38	38	**Scope**: Risk tier policies, publication rules, content guidelines, ethical boundaries
39	39
40	40	**Process**:
41		-
42	42	* Proposal published for community feedback
43	43	* Discussion period (recommendation: minimum 14 days for major changes)
44	44	* Governing Team decision with community input
...	...	@@ -46,7 +46,6 @@
46	46	* Risk tier policy changes require Expert consultation
47	47
48	48	**Examples**:
49		-
50	50	* Defining Tier A domains
51	51	* Setting audit sampling rates
52	52	* Content moderation policies
...	...	@@ -57,7 +57,6 @@
57	57	**Scope**: Domain quality standards, source reliability in specialized fields, Tier A content validation
58	58
59	59	**Process**:
60		-
61	61	* Expert consensus in domain
62	62	* Documented reasoning
63	63	* Review by other experts
...	...	@@ -65,12 +65,12 @@
65	65	* Experts set domain-specific audit criteria
66	66
67	67	**Examples**:
68		-
69	69	* Medical claim evaluation standards
70	70	* Legal citation requirements
71	71	* Scientific methodology thresholds
72	72	* Tier A approval criteria by domain
73	73
	69	+
74	74	== 3. AI and Human Roles in Governance ==
75	75
76	76	=== 3.1 Human-Only Governance Decisions ===
...	...	@@ -97,12 +97,12 @@
97	97	=== 3.3 Transparency Requirement ===
98	98
99	99	All governance decisions must be:
100		-
101	101	* **Documented** with reasoning
102	102	* **Published** for community visibility
103	103	* **Reviewable** by community members
104	104	* **Reversible** if evidence of error or harm
105	105
	101	+
106	106	== 4. Audit System Governance ==
107	107
108	108	=== 4.1 Audit Oversight Committee ===
...	...	@@ -110,7 +110,6 @@
110	110	**Composition**: Maintainers, Domain Experts, and Governing Team member(s)
111	111
112	112	**Responsibilities**:
113		-
114	114	* Set quality standards for audit evaluation
115	115	* Review audit statistics and trends
116	116	* Adjust sampling rates based on performance
...	...	@@ -125,7 +125,6 @@
125	125	=== 4.2 Audit Performance Metrics ===
126	126
127	127	Tracked and published:
128		-
129	129	* Audit pass/fail rates by tier
130	130	* Common failure patterns
131	131	* System improvements implemented
...	...	@@ -135,7 +135,6 @@
135	135	=== 4.3 Feedback Loop Governance ===
136	136
137	137	**Process**:
138		-
139	139	1. Audits identify patterns in AI errors
140	140	2. Audit Committee reviews patterns
141	141	3. Maintainers propose technical fixes
...	...	@@ -144,11 +144,11 @@
144	144	6. Deployed with monitoring
145	145
146	146	**Escalation**:
147		-
148	148	* Persistent high failure rates → Pause AI publication in affected tier/domain
149	149	* Critical errors → Immediate system review
150	150	* Pattern of harm → Policy revision
151	151
	144	+
152	152	== 5. Risk tier Policy Governance ==
153	153
154	154	=== 5.1 Risk Tier Assignment Authority ===
...	...	@@ -161,7 +161,6 @@
161	161	=== 5.2 Risk Tier Review Process ===
162	162
163	163	**Triggers for Review**:
164		-
165	165	* Significant audit failures in a tier
166	166	* New emerging topics or domains
167	167	* Community flags systematic misclassification
...	...	@@ -169,7 +169,6 @@
169	169	* Periodic policy review
170	170
171	171	**Process**:
172		-
173	173	1. Expert domain review (identify if Tier A/B/C appropriate)
174	174	2. Community input period (recommendation: sufficient time for feedback)
175	175	3. Audit Committee assessment (error patterns in current tier)
...	...	@@ -195,7 +195,6 @@
195	195	**Who Can Propose**: Maintainers, Experts, Audit Committee
196	196
197	197	**Requirements**:
198		-
199	199	* Rationale based on audit failures or system improvements
200	200	* Testing in sandbox environment
201	201	* Impact assessment (false positive/negative rates)
...	...	@@ -202,17 +202,16 @@
202	202	* Community notification before deployment
203	203
204	204	**Approval**:
205		-
206	206	* Technical changes: Maintainer consensus
207	207	* Policy changes (e.g., new gate criteria): Governing Team approval
208	208
209	209	**Examples of Governed Changes**:
210		-
211	211	* Adjusting contradiction search scope
212	212	* Modifying source reliability thresholds
213	213	* Adding new bubble detection patterns
214	214	* Changing uncertainty quantification formulas
215	215
	204	+
216	216	== 7. Community Participation ==
217	217
218	218	=== 7.1 Open Discussion Forums ===
...	...	@@ -225,7 +225,6 @@
225	225	=== 7.2 Proposal Mechanism ===
226	226
227	227	Anyone can propose:
228		-
229	229	1. Submit proposal with rationale
230	230	2. Community discussion (recommendation: minimum timeframe for feedback)
231	231	3. Relevant authority reviews (Maintainers/Governing Team/Experts)
...	...	@@ -240,6 +240,7 @@
240	240	* Expert recommendations documented
241	241	* Community feedback acknowledged
242	242
	231	+
243	243	== 8. Dispute Resolution ==
244	244
245	245	=== 8.1 Conflict Between Experts ===
...	...	@@ -260,7 +260,6 @@
260	260	=== 8.3 User Appeals ===
261	261
262	262	Users can appeal:
263		-
264	264	* Content rejection decisions
265	265	* Risk tier assignments
266	266	* Audit outcomes
...	...	@@ -267,15 +267,16 @@
267	267	* Moderation actions
268	268
269	269	**Process**:
270		-
271	271	1. Submit appeal with evidence
272	272	2. Reviewed by independent moderator/expert
273	273	3. Decision with reasoning
274	274	4. Final appeal to Governing Team (if warranted)
275	275
	263	+
276	276	== 9. Related Pages ==
277	277
278		-* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>Archive.FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]]
	266	+* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]]
279	279	* [[Automation>>FactHarbor.Specification.Automation.WebHome]]
280	280	* [[Requirements (Roles)>>FactHarbor.Specification.Requirements.WebHome]]
281	281	* [[Organisational Model>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Organisational-Model]]
	270	+