Changes for page Requirements

Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/24 20:34

From 7.1 to 6.1 From 8.7 to 8.6

From version 8.6

edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/12/16 21:39

Change comment: Renamed back-links.

To version 7.1

edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/12/14 22:27

Change comment: Imported from XAR

Raw
Rendered

Summary

Page properties (1 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)

Details

Page properties

Content

@@ -9,7 +9,6 @@
  **Who**: Anyone (no login required).
  **Can**:
--
  * Browse and search claims
  * View scenarios, evidence, verdicts, and timelines
  * Compare scenarios and explore assumptions
@@ -19,7 +19,6 @@
  * **Submit claims automatically** by providing text to analyze - new claims are added automatically unless equal claims already exist in the system
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Modify existing content
  * Access draft content
  * Participate in governance decisions
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
  **Who**: Registered and logged-in users (extends Reader capabilities).
  **Can**:
--
  * Everything a Reader can do
  * Submit claims
  * Submit evidence
@@ -41,7 +41,6 @@
  * Request human review of AI-generated content
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Publish or mark content as "reviewed" or "approved"
  * Override expert or maintainer decisions
  * Directly modify AKEL or quality gate configurations
@@ -51,7 +51,6 @@
  **Who**: Trusted community members, appointed by maintainers.
  **Can**:
--
  * Review contributions from Contributors and AKEL drafts
  * Validate AI-generated content (Mode 2 → Mode 3 transition)
  * Edit claims, scenarios, and evidence
@@ -62,7 +62,6 @@
  * Participate in audit sampling
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Approve Tier A content for "Human-Reviewed" status (requires Expert)
  * Change governance rules
  * Unilaterally change expert conclusions without process
@@ -69,7 +69,6 @@
  * Bypass quality gates
  **Note on AI-Drafted Content**:
--
  * Reviewers can validate AI-generated content (Mode 2) to promote it to "Human-Reviewed" (Mode 3)
  * For Tier B and C, Reviewers have approval authority
  * For Tier A, only Experts can grant "Human-Reviewed" status
@@ -79,7 +79,6 @@
  **Who**: Subject-matter specialists in specific domains (medicine, law, science, etc.).
  **Can**:
--
  * Everything a Reviewer can do
  * **Final authority** on Tier A content "Human-Reviewed" status
  * Validate complex or controversial claims in their domain
@@ -89,13 +89,11 @@
  * Override AKEL suggestions in their domain (with documentation)
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Change platform governance policies
  * Approve content outside their expertise domain
  * Bypass technical quality gates (but can flag for adjustment)
  **Specialization**:
--
  * Experts are domain-specific (e.g., "Medical Expert", "Legal Expert", "Climate Science Expert")
  * Cross-domain claims may require multiple expert reviews
@@ -104,7 +104,6 @@
  **Who**: Reviewers or Experts assigned to sampling audit duties.
  **Can**:
--
  * Review sampled AI-generated content against quality standards
  * Validate quality gate enforcement
  * Identify patterns in AI errors or hallucinations
@@ -113,19 +113,16 @@
  * Contribute to audit statistics and transparency reports
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Change audit sampling algorithms (maintainer responsibility)
  * Bypass normal review workflows
  * Audit content they personally created
  **Selection**:
--
  * Auditors selected based on domain expertise and review quality
  * Rotation to prevent audit fatigue
  * Stratified assignment (Tier A auditors need higher expertise)
  **Audit Focus**:
--
  * Tier A: Recommendation 30-50% sampling rate, expert auditors
  * Tier B: Recommendation 10-20% sampling rate, reviewer/expert auditors
  * Tier C: Recommendation 5-10% sampling rate, reviewer auditors
@@ -135,7 +135,6 @@
  **Who**: Maintainers or trusted long-term contributors.
  **Can**:
--
  * All Reviewer and Expert capabilities (cross-domain)
  * Manage user accounts and permissions
  * Handle disputes and conflicts
@@ -146,7 +146,6 @@
  * Oversee audit system performance
  **Cannot**:
--
  * Change core data model or architecture
  * Override technical system constraints
  * Make unilateral governance decisions without consensus
@@ -156,7 +156,6 @@
  **Who**: Core team members responsible for the platform.
  **Can**:
--
  * All Moderator capabilities
  * Change data model, architecture, and technical systems
  * Configure quality gates and AKEL parameters
@@ -168,7 +168,6 @@
  * Grant and revoke roles
  **Governance**:
--
  * Maintainers operate under organizational governance rules
  * Major policy changes require Governing Team approval
  * Technical decisions made collaboratively
@@ -178,7 +178,6 @@
  == Content Publication States ==
  === Mode 1: Draft ===
--
  * Not visible to public
  * Visible to contributor and reviewers
  * Can be edited by contributor or reviewers
@@ -185,20 +185,18 @@
  * Default state for failed quality gates
  === Mode 2: AI-Generated (Published) ===
--
  * **Public** and visible to all users
  * Clearly labeled as "AI-Generated, Awaiting Human Review"
  * Passed all automated quality gates
  * Risk tier displayed (A/B/C)
  * Users can:
--** Read and use content
--** Request human review
--** Flag for expert attention
++  ** Read and use content
++  ** Request human review
++  ** Flag for expert attention
  * Subject to sampling audits
  * Can be promoted to Mode 3 by reviewer/expert validation
  === Mode 3: Human-Reviewed (Published) ===
--
  * **Public** and visible to all users
  * Labeled as "Human-Reviewed" with reviewer/expert attribution
  * Passed quality gates + human validation
@@ -207,7 +207,6 @@
  * For Tier B/C, Reviewer approval sufficient
  === Rejected ===
--
  * Not visible to public
  * Visible to contributor with rejection reason
  * Can be resubmitted after addressing issues
@@ -218,7 +218,6 @@
  == Contribution Rules ==
  === All Contributors Must: ===
--
  * Provide sources for claims
  * Use clear, neutral language
  * Avoid personal attacks or insults
@@ -226,7 +226,6 @@
  * Accept community feedback gracefully
  === AKEL (AI) Must: ===
--
  * Mark all outputs with `AuthorType = AI`
  * Pass quality gates before Mode 2 publication
  * Perform mandatory contradiction search
@@ -236,7 +236,6 @@
  * Submit to audit sampling
  === Reviewers Must: ===
--
  * Be impartial and evidence-based
  * Document reasoning for decisions
  * Escalate to experts when appropriate
@@ -244,7 +244,6 @@
  * Provide constructive feedback
  === Experts Must: ===
--
  * Stay within domain expertise
  * Disclose conflicts of interest
  * Document specialized terminology
@@ -256,7 +256,6 @@
  == Quality Standards ==
  === Source Requirements ===
--
  * Primary sources preferred over secondary
  * Publication date and author must be identifiable
  * Sources must be accessible (not paywalled when possible)
@@ -264,7 +264,6 @@
  * Echo chamber sources must be flagged
  === Claim Requirements ===
--
  * Falsifiable or evaluable
  * Clear definitions of key terms
  * Boundaries and scope stated
@@ -272,7 +272,6 @@
  * Uncertainty acknowledged
  === Evidence Requirements ===
--
  * Relevant to the claim and scenario
  * Reliability assessment provided
  * Methodology described (for studies)
@@ -288,7 +288,6 @@
  **Review**: Risk tiers periodically reviewed based on audit outcomes
  **Tier A Indicators**:
--
  * Medical diagnosis or treatment advice
  * Legal interpretation or advice
  * Election or voting information
@@ -297,7 +297,6 @@
  * Potential for significant harm
  **Tier B Indicators**:
--
  * Complex scientific causality
  * Contested policy domains
  * Historical interpretation with political implications
@@ -304,7 +304,6 @@
  * Significant economic impact claims
  **Tier C Indicators**:
--
  * Established historical facts
  * Simple definitions
  * Well-documented scientific consensus
@@ -312,371 +312,10 @@
  ----
--
------
--
--== User Role Hierarchy Diagram ==
--
--The following diagram visualizes the complete role hierarchy:
--
--{{include reference="FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.23 Lost Data.Specification.Diagrams.User Class Diagram.WebHome"/}}
--
------
--
------
--
--== Role Hierarchy Diagrams ==
--
--=== User Class Diagram ===
--
--The following class diagram visualizes the complete user role hierarchy:
--
--{{include reference="FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.23 Lost Data.Specification.Diagrams.User Class Diagram.WebHome"/}}
--
--=== Human User Roles ===
--
--This diagram shows the two-track progression for human users:
--
--{{include reference="FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.23 Lost Data.Specification.Diagrams.Human User Roles.WebHome"/}}
--
--=== Technical and System Users ===
--
--This diagram shows system processes and their management:
--
--{{include reference="FactHarbor.Archive.FactHarbor V0\.9\.23 Lost Data.Specification.Diagrams.Technical and System Users.WebHome"/}}
--
--**Key Design Principles**:
--
--* **Two tracks from Contributor**: Content Track (Reviewer) and Technical Track (Maintainer)
--* **Technical Users**: System processes (AKEL, bots) managed by Maintainers
--* **Separation of concerns**: Editorial authority independent from technical authority
--
------
--
--
--
------
--
--= Functional Requirements =
--
--
--
--This page defines what the FactHarbor system must **do** to fulfill its mission.
--
--Requirements are structured as FR (Functional Requirement) items and organized by capability area.
--
------
--
--== Claim Intake & Normalization ==
--
--=== FR1 – Claim Intake ===
--
--The system must support Claim creation from:
--
--* Free-text input (from any Reader)
--* URLs (web pages, articles, posts)
--* Uploaded documents and transcripts
--* Structured feeds (optional, e.g. from partner platforms)
--* Automated ingestion (federation input)
--* AKEL extraction from multi-claim texts
--
--**Automatic submission**: Any Reader can submit text, and new claims are added automatically unless identical claims already exist.
--
--=== FR2 – Claim Normalization ===
--
--* Convert diverse inputs into short, structured, declarative claims
--* Preserve original phrasing for reference
--* Avoid hidden reinterpretation; differences between original and normalized phrasing must be visible
--
--=== FR3 – Claim Classification ===
--
--* Classify claims by topic, domain, and type (e.g., quantitative, causal, normative)
--* Assign risk tier (A/B/C) based on domain and potential impact
--* Suggest which node / experts are relevant
--
--=== FR4 – Claim Clustering ===
--
--* Group similar claims into Claim Clusters
--* Allow manual correction of cluster membership
--* Provide explanation why two claims are considered "same cluster"
--
------
--
--== Scenario System ==
--
--=== FR5 – Scenario Creation ===
--
--* Contributors, Reviewers, and Experts can create scenarios
--* AKEL can propose draft scenarios
--* Each scenario is tied to exactly one Claim Cluster
--
--=== FR6 – Required Scenario Fields ===
--
--Each scenario includes:
--
--* Definitions (key terms)
--* Assumptions (explicit, testable where possible)
--* Boundaries (time, geography, population, conditions)
--* Scope of evidence considered
--* Intended decision / context (optional)
--
--=== FR7 – Scenario Versioning ===
--
--* Every change to a scenario creates a new version
--* Previous versions remain accessible with timestamps and rationale
--* ParentVersionID links versions
--
--=== FR8 – Scenario Comparison ===
--
--* Users can compare scenarios side by side
--* Show differences in assumptions, definitions, and evidence sets
--
------
--
--== Evidence Management ==
--
--=== FR9 – Evidence Ingestion ===
--
--* Attach external sources (articles, studies, datasets, reports, transcripts) to Scenarios
--* Allow multiple pieces of evidence per Scenario
--* Support large file uploads (with size limits)
--
--=== FR10 – Evidence Assessment ===
--
--For each piece of evidence:
--
--* Assign reliability / quality ratings
--* Capture who rated it and why
--* Indicate known limitations, biases, or conflicts of interest
--* Track evidence version history
--
--=== FR11 – Evidence Linking ===
--
--* Link one piece of evidence to multiple scenarios if relevant
--* Make dependencies explicit (e.g., "Scenario A uses subset of evidence used in Scenario B")
--* Use ScenarioEvidenceLink table with RelevanceScore
--
------
--
--== Verdicts & Truth Landscape ==
--
--=== FR12 – Scenario Verdicts ===
--
--For each Scenario:
--
--* Provide a **probability- or likelihood-based verdict**
--* Capture uncertainty and reasoning
--* Distinguish between AKEL draft and human-approved verdict
--* Support Mode 1 (draft), Mode 2 (AI-generated), Mode 3 (human-reviewed)
--
--=== FR13 – Truth Landscape ===
--
--* Aggregate all scenario-specific verdicts into a "truth landscape" for a claim
--* Make disagreements visible rather than collapsing them into a single binary result
--* Show parallel scenarios and their respective verdicts
--
--=== FR14 – Time Evolution ===
--
--* Show how verdicts and evidence evolve over time
--* Allow users to see "as of date X, what did we know?"
--* Maintain complete version history for auditing
--
------
--
--== Workflow, Moderation & Audit ==
--
--=== FR15 – Workflow States ===
--
--* Draft → In Review → Published / Rejected
--* Separate states for Claims, Scenarios, Evidence, and Verdicts
--* Support Mode 1/2/3 publication model
--
--=== FR16 – Moderation & Abuse Handling ===
--
--* Allow Moderators to hide content or lock edits for abuse or legal reasons
--* Keep internal audit trail even if public view is restricted
--* Support user reporting and flagging
--
--=== FR17 – Audit Trail ===
--
--* Every significant action (create, edit, publish, delete/hide) is logged with:
--** Who did it
--** When (timestamp)
--** What changed (diffs)
--** Why (justification text)
--
------
--
--== Quality Gates & AI Review ==
--
--=== FR18 – Quality Gate Validation ===
--
--Before AI-generated content (Mode 2) publication, enforce:
--
--* Gate 1: Source Quality
--* Gate 2: Contradiction Search (MANDATORY)
--* Gate 3: Uncertainty Quantification
--* Gate 4: Structural Integrity
--
--=== FR19 – Audit Sampling ===
--
--* Implement stratified sampling by risk tier
--* Recommendation: 30-50% Tier A, 10-20% Tier B, 5-10% Tier C
--* Support audit workflow and feedback loop
--
--=== FR20 – Risk Tier Assignment ===
--
--* AKEL suggests tier based on domain, keywords, impact
--* Moderators and Experts can override
--* Risk tier affects publication workflow
--
------
--
--== Federation Requirements ==
--
--=== FR21 – Node Autonomy ===
--
--* Each node can run independently (local policies, local users, local moderation)
--* Nodes decide which other nodes to federate with
--* Trust levels: Trusted / Neutral / Untrusted
--
--=== FR22 – Data Sharing Modes ===
--
--Nodes must be able to:
--
--* Share claims and summaries only
--* Share selected claims, scenarios, and verdicts
--* Share full underlying evidence metadata where allowed
--* Opt-out of sharing sensitive or restricted content
--
--=== FR23 – Synchronization & Conflict Handling ===
--
--* Changes from remote nodes must be mergeable or explicitly conflict-marked
--* Conflicting verdicts are allowed and visible; not forced into consensus
--* Support push/pull/subscription synchronization
--
--=== FR24 – Federation Discovery ===
--
--* Discover other nodes and their capabilities (public endpoints, policies)
--* Allow whitelisting / blacklisting of nodes
--* Global identifier format: `factharbor://node_url/type/local_id`
--
--=== FR25 – Cross-Node AI Knowledge Exchange ===
--
--* Share vector embeddings for clustering
--* Share canonical claim forms
--* Share scenario templates
--* Share contradiction alerts
--* NEVER share model weights
--* NEVER override local governance
--
------
--
--== Non-Functional Requirements ==
--
--=== NFR1 – Transparency ===
--
--* All assumptions, evidence, and reasoning behind verdicts must be visible
--* AKEL involvement must be clearly labeled
--* Users must be able to inspect the chain of reasoning and versions
--
--=== NFR2 – Security ===
--
--* Role-based access control
--* Transport-level security (HTTPS)
--* Secure storage of secrets (API keys, credentials)
--* Audit trails for sensitive actions
--
--=== NFR3 – Privacy & Compliance ===
--
--* Configurable data retention policies
--* Ability to redact or pseudonymize personal data when required
--* Compliance hooks for jurisdiction-specific rules (e.g. GDPR-like deletion requests)
--
--=== NFR4 – Performance ===
--
--* POC: typical interactions < 2 s
--* Release 1.0: < 300 ms for common read operations after caching
--* Degradation strategies under load
--
--=== NFR5 – Scalability ===
--
--* POC: 50 internal testers on one node
--* Beta 0: 100 external testers on one node
--* Release 1.0: **2000+ concurrent users** on a reasonably provisioned node
--
--Technical targets for Release 1.0:
--
--* Scalable monolith or early microservice architecture
--* Sharded vector database (for semantic search)
--* Optional IPFS or other decentralized storage for large artifacts
--* Horizontal scalability for read capacity
--
--=== NFR6 – Interoperability ===
--
--* Open, documented API
--* Modular AKEL that can be swapped or extended
--* Federation protocols that follow open standards where possible
--* Standard model for external integrations
--
--=== NFR7 – Observability & Operations ===
--
--* Metrics for performance, errors, and queue backlogs
--* Logs for key flows (claim intake, scenario changes, verdict updates, federation sync)
--* Health endpoints for monitoring
--
--=== NFR8 – Maintainability ===
--
--* Clear module boundaries (API, core services, AKEL, storage, federation)
--* Backward-compatible schema migration strategy where feasible
--* Configuration via files / environment variables, not hard-coded
--
--=== NFR9 – Usability ===
--
--* UI optimized for **exploring complexity**, not hiding it
--* Support for saved views, filters, and user-level preferences
--* Progressive disclosure: casual users see summaries, advanced users can dive deep
--
------
--
--== Release Levels ==
--
--=== Proof of Concept (POC) ===
--
--* Single node
--* Limited user set (50 internal testers)
--* Basic claim → scenario → evidence → verdict flow
--* Minimal federation (optional)
--* AI-generated publication (Mode 2) demonstration
--* Quality gates active
--
--=== Beta 0 ===
--
--* One or few nodes
--* External testers (100)
--* Expanded workflows and basic moderation
--* Initial federation experiments
--* Audit sampling implemented
--
--=== Release 1.0 ===
--
--* 2000+ concurrent users
--* Scalable architecture
--* Sharded vector DB
--* IPFS optional
--* High automation (AKEL assistance)
--* Multi-node federation with full sync protocol
--* Mature audit system
--
------
--
--
--
  == Related Pages ==
--
--
--* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification V0\.9\.18.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]]
--* [[Automation>>FactHarbor.Specification V0\.9\.18.Automation.WebHome]]
++* [[AKEL (AI Knowledge Extraction Layer)>>FactHarbor.Specification.AI Knowledge Extraction Layer (AKEL).WebHome]]
++* [[Automation>>FactHarbor.Specification.Automation.WebHome]]
  * [[Workflows>>FactHarbor.Specification.Workflows.WebHome]]
  * [[Governance>>FactHarbor.Organisation.Governance]]
++

Changes for page Requirements

Summary

Details

Applications

Navigation

Need help?