Last modified by Robert Schaub on 2025/12/24 20:35

From version 6.3
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/11/27 12:36
Change comment: Renamed back-links.
To version 1.1
edited by Robert Schaub
on 2025/11/27 12:02
Change comment: There is no comment for this version

Summary

Details

Page properties
Parent
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1 -FactHarbor.Playground.WebHome
1 +FactHarbor.Specification.Data Model.WebHome
Content
... ... @@ -1,7 +5,3 @@
1 -(((
2 -
3 -)))
4 -
5 5  = 5. Data Model =
6 6  
7 7  The FactHarbor data model centers on four fully versioned, immutable entities:
... ... @@ -45,10 +45,10 @@
45 45   (scenarios live at the *claim* level, not per individual phrasing).
46 46  * Verdicts and Scenario–Evidence links are always attached to **versions**:
47 47  * {{code}}SCENARIO_VERSION{{/code}} +
48 -{{code}}EVIDENCE_VERSION{{/code}} →
49 -{{code}}SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION{{/code}}
44 + {{code}}EVIDENCE_VERSION{{/code}} →
45 + {{code}}SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION{{/code}}
50 50  * {{code}}SCENARIO_VERSION{{/code}} →
51 -{{code}}VERDICT_VERSION{{/code}}
47 + {{code}}VERDICT_VERSION{{/code}}
52 52  
53 53  This ensures that when a Scenario or Evidence changes, old verdicts and links
54 54  remain intact as historical records and can be revisited.
... ... @@ -61,111 +61,128 @@
61 61  The convention is that fields ending in {{code}}Id{{/code}} are primary keys,
62 62  and fields with {{code}}...IdFk{{/code}} are foreign keys.
63 63  
64 -{{comment}} Core Data Model ERD (Mermaid, from /Specification/Diagrams/Data Model) {{/comment}}
65 -{{include document="FactHarbor.Playground.Core Data Model ERD Page (from Specification chat).WebHome" reference="FactHarbor.Playground.data.Core Data Model ERD Page (from Specification chat).WebHome"/}}
66 -
67 -= Core Data Model ERD (Versioned) =
68 -
69 -This diagram shows the full core data model with all versioned entities.
70 -
71 71  {{mermaid}}
72 72  erDiagram
62 +
73 73   CLAIM_CLUSTER {
74 - string ClusterID PK
75 - string EmbeddingVectorRef
76 - string Theme
64 + string claimClusterId
65 + string theme
66 + string embeddingVectorRef
67 + string language
68 + datetime createdAt
77 77   }
78 78  
79 79   CLAIM {
80 - string ClaimID PK
81 - string ClusterID FK
82 - string Status
83 - datetime CreatedAt
72 + string claimId
73 + string claimClusterIdFk
74 + string status
75 + datetime createdAt
84 84   }
85 85  
86 86   CLAIM_VERSION {
87 - string ClaimVersionID PK
88 - string ClaimID FK
89 - string Text
90 - string ClaimType
91 - string Domain
92 - datetime CreatedAt
79 + string claimVersionId
80 + string claimIdFk
81 + string text
82 + string language
83 + string claimType
84 + string domain
85 + string authorType
86 + datetime createdAt
93 93   }
94 94  
95 95   SCENARIO {
96 - string ScenarioID PK
97 - string ClaimID FK
98 - string Name
99 - datetime CreatedAt
90 + string scenarioId
91 + string claimIdFk
92 + string key
93 + string title
94 + boolean isDeprecated
100 100   }
101 101  
102 102   SCENARIO_VERSION {
103 - string ScenarioVersionID PK
104 - string ScenarioID FK
105 - string Definitions
106 - string Assumptions
107 - string Boundaries
108 - datetime CreatedAt
98 + string scenarioVersionId
99 + string scenarioIdFk
100 + string versionTag
101 + string definitionsJson
102 + string assumptionsJson
103 + string boundariesJson
104 + string notes
105 + datetime createdAt
109 109   }
110 110  
111 111   EVIDENCE {
112 - string EvidenceID PK
113 - string SourceType
114 - string URL
115 - float ReliabilityScore
109 + string evidenceId
110 + string canonicalSourceId
111 + string mainUrl
112 + string evidenceType
113 + string language
116 116   }
117 117  
118 118   EVIDENCE_VERSION {
119 - string EvidenceVersionID PK
120 - string EvidenceID FK
121 - string Summary
122 - float ReliabilityScore
123 - datetime CreatedAt
117 + string evidenceVersionId
118 + string evidenceIdFk
119 + string snapshotLocation
120 + string extractionSummary
121 + string reliabilityModel
122 + datetime collectedAt
123 + datetime createdAt
124 124   }
125 125  
126 126   SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK {
127 - string LinkID PK
128 - string ScenarioVersionID FK
129 - string EvidenceVersionID FK
130 - float Relevance
131 - string Direction
127 + string scenarioEvidenceLinkId
128 + string scenarioIdFk
129 + string evidenceIdFk
132 132   }
133 133  
132 + SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION {
133 + string scenarioEvidenceLinkVersionId
134 + string scenarioEvidenceLinkIdFk
135 + string scenarioVersionIdFk
136 + string evidenceVersionIdFk
137 + float relevance
138 + string direction %% SUPPORTS / CONTRADICTS / MIXED / CONTEXT
139 + string rationale
140 + datetime createdAt
141 + }
142 +
134 134   VERDICT {
135 - string VerdictID PK
136 - string ScenarioID FK
144 + string verdictId
145 + string scenarioIdFk
146 + string verdictType %% e.g. likelihood, classification
137 137   }
138 138  
139 139   VERDICT_VERSION {
140 - string VerdictVersionID PK
141 - string VerdictID FK
142 - float Verdict
143 - float Confidence
144 - string Reasoning
145 - datetime CreatedAt
150 + string verdictVersionId
151 + string verdictIdFk
152 + string scenarioVersionIdFk
153 + float probability
154 + float confidence
155 + string reasoningSummary
156 + string uncertaintyFactorsJson
157 + datetime createdAt
146 146   }
147 147  
160 + %% Relationships
161 +
148 148   CLAIM_CLUSTER ||--o{ CLAIM : contains
149 - CLAIM ||--o{ CLAIM_VERSION : versions
163 + CLAIM ||--o{ CLAIM_VERSION : has_versions
164 + CLAIM ||--o{ SCENARIO : has_scenarios
165 + SCENARIO ||--o{ SCENARIO_VERSION : has_versions
150 150  
151 - CLAIM ||--o{ SCENARIO : has
152 - SCENARIO ||--o{ SCENARIO_VERSION : versions
167 + EVIDENCE ||--o{ EVIDENCE_VERSION : has_versions
153 153  
154 - EVIDENCE ||--o{ EVIDENCE_VERSION : versions
169 + SCENARIO ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK : may_link
170 + EVIDENCE ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK : may_link
155 155  
156 - SCENARIO_VERSION ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK : links
157 - EVIDENCE_VERSION ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK : linked
172 + SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION : has_versions
158 158  
159 - SCENARIO ||--o{ VERDICT : assessed
160 - VERDICT ||--o{ VERDICT_VERSION : versions
174 + SCENARIO_VERSION ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION : uses_evidence
175 + EVIDENCE_VERSION ||--o{ SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION : is_used_in
176 +
177 + SCENARIO ||--o{ VERDICT : has_verdicts
178 + VERDICT ||--o{ VERDICT_VERSION : has_versions
179 + SCENARIO_VERSION ||--o{ VERDICT_VERSION : assessed_in
161 161  {{/mermaid}}
162 162  
163 -{{info}}
164 -All key entities are explicitly versioned here (…VERSION tables).
165 -This reflects the versioning requirements in the textual Data Model chapter.
166 -{{/info}}
167 -
168 -
169 169  **Important points:**
170 170  
171 171  * Scenarios and Evidence are **linked via their versions**
... ... @@ -186,164 +186,87 @@
186 186  * Roles and role assignments
187 187  * Review actions on versioned entities
188 188  
189 -{{comment}} Data Use ERD (Mermaid, from /Specification/Diagrams/Data Use ERD) {{/comment}}
190 -{{include document="FactHarbor.Playground.Data Use ERD Page (from Specification chat).WebHome" reference="FactHarbor.Playground.data.Data Use ERD Page (from Specification chat).WebHome"/}}
191 -
192 -= Data Use ERD (Roles, Review & Versioned Entities) =
193 -
194 -This diagram shows how users, roles, and review actions relate to the
195 -versioned core entities.
196 -
197 197  {{mermaid}}
198 198  erDiagram
199 - %% Core clusters shown for context
200 - CLAIM_CLUSTER {
201 - string ClusterID PK
202 - string EmbeddingVectorRef
203 - string Theme
204 - }
205 205  
206 - CLAIM {
207 - string ClaimID PK
208 - string ClusterID FK
209 - string Status
210 - datetime CreatedAt
205 + USER {
206 + string userId
207 + string displayName
208 + string email
209 + string userType %% "human" or "technical"
210 + datetime createdAt
211 211   }
212 212  
213 - CLAIM_VERSION {
214 - string ClaimVersionID PK
215 - string ClaimID FK
216 - string Text
217 - string ClaimType
218 - string Domain
219 - datetime CreatedAt
213 + TECHNICAL_USER {
214 + string technicalUserId
215 + string userIdFk
216 + string description
217 + string systemIdentifier
220 220   }
221 221  
222 - SCENARIO {
223 - string ScenarioID PK
224 - string ClaimID FK
225 - string Name
226 - datetime CreatedAt
220 + ROLE {
221 + string roleId
222 + string code %% e.g. READER, CONTRIBUTOR, REVIEWER, TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR, MODERATOR, SYSTEM_ADMIN, FEDERATION_OPERATOR, FEDERATION_ADMIN
223 + string description
224 + boolean isFederationRole
227 227   }
228 228  
229 - SCENARIO_VERSION {
230 - string ScenarioVersionID PK
231 - string ScenarioID FK
232 - string Definitions
233 - string Assumptions
234 - string Boundaries
235 - datetime CreatedAt
227 + USER_ROLE_MEMBERSHIP {
228 + string membershipId
229 + string userIdFk
230 + string roleIdFk
231 + datetime grantedAt
232 + string grantedByUserIdFk
236 236   }
237 237  
238 - EVIDENCE {
239 - string EvidenceID PK
240 - string SourceType
241 - string URL
242 - float ReliabilityScore
235 + REVIEW_ACTION {
236 + string reviewActionId
237 + string subjectType %% e.g. CLAIM_VERSION, SCENARIO_VERSION...
238 + string subjectVersionId
239 + string actionType %% APPROVE, REJECT, FLAG, COMMENT, REQUEST_CHANGES...
240 + string outcome %% ACCEPTED, REJECTED, ESCALATED...
241 + string comment
242 + string createdByUserIdFk
243 + datetime createdAt
243 243   }
244 244  
245 - EVIDENCE_VERSION {
246 - string EvidenceVersionID PK
247 - string EvidenceID FK
248 - string Summary
249 - float ReliabilityScore
250 - datetime CreatedAt
251 - }
246 + %% Versioned data entities (references from the core model)
252 252  
253 - VERDICT {
254 - string VerdictID PK
255 - string ScenarioID FK
248 + CLAIM_VERSION {
249 + string claimVersionId
256 256   }
257 257  
258 - VERDICT_VERSION {
259 - string VerdictVersionID PK
260 - string VerdictID FK
261 - float Verdict
262 - float Confidence
263 - string Reasoning
264 - datetime CreatedAt
252 + SCENARIO_VERSION {
253 + string scenarioVersionId
265 265   }
266 266  
267 - %% Users and roles
268 - USER {
269 - string UserID PK
270 - string Handle
271 - string Email
256 + EVIDENCE_VERSION {
257 + string evidenceVersionId
272 272   }
273 273  
274 - TECHNICAL_USER {
275 - string UserID PK
276 - string SystemName
260 + SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION {
261 + string scenarioEvidenceLinkVersionId
277 277   }
278 278  
279 - CONTRIBUTING_USER {
280 - string UserID PK
281 - string DisplayName
264 + VERDICT_VERSION {
265 + string verdictVersionId
282 282   }
283 283  
284 - TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR {
285 - string UserID PK
286 - string TrustLevel
287 - }
268 + %% Relationships
288 288  
289 - REVIEWER {
290 - string UserID PK
291 - string Domain
292 - }
270 + USER ||--o{ TECHNICAL_USER : may_be
271 + USER ||--o{ USER_ROLE_MEMBERSHIP : has_role
272 + ROLE ||--o{ USER_ROLE_MEMBERSHIP : assigned_to
293 293  
294 - EXPERT {
295 - string UserID PK
296 - string ExpertiseArea
297 - }
298 -
299 - FEDERATION_NODE {
300 - string NodeID PK
301 - string Region
302 - }
303 -
304 - FEDERATION_ADMIN {
305 - string UserID PK
306 - string Permissions
307 - }
308 -
309 - REVIEW_ACTION {
310 - string ReviewActionID PK
311 - string UserID FK
312 - string TargetEntityType
313 - string TargetEntityVersionID
314 - string ActionType
315 - string Comment
316 - datetime Timestamp
317 - }
318 -
319 - %% Inheritance / specialization (modelled as relationships)
320 - USER ||--o{ TECHNICAL_USER : "is a"
321 - USER ||--o{ CONTRIBUTING_USER : "is a"
322 -
323 - CONTRIBUTING_USER ||--o{ TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR : "subset"
324 - CONTRIBUTING_USER ||--o{ REVIEWER : "subset"
325 - CONTRIBUTING_USER ||--o{ EXPERT : "subset"
326 -
327 - TECHNICAL_USER ||--o{ FEDERATION_NODE : "operates"
328 - TECHNICAL_USER ||--o{ FEDERATION_ADMIN : "administers"
329 -
330 - %% Review actions on versioned entities
331 331   USER ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : performs
332 332  
333 - REVIEW_ACTION }o--|| CLAIM_VERSION : reviews
334 - REVIEW_ACTION }o--|| SCENARIO_VERSION : reviews
335 - REVIEW_ACTION }o--|| EVIDENCE_VERSION : reviews
336 - REVIEW_ACTION }o--|| VERDICT_VERSION : reviews
276 + CLAIM_VERSION ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : is_reviewed_in
277 + SCENARIO_VERSION ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : is_reviewed_in
278 + EVIDENCE_VERSION ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : is_reviewed_in
279 + SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : is_reviewed_in
280 + VERDICT_VERSION ||--o{ REVIEW_ACTION : is_reviewed_in
337 337  {{/mermaid}}
338 338  
339 -{{info}}
340 -This diagram focuses on *who* uses and reviews *which* versioned entities.
341 -USER is the base type; TECHNICAL_USER and CONTRIBUTING_USER are specializations.
342 -Other roles (REVIEWER, EXPERT, TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR, FEDERATION_ADMIN, FEDERATION_NODE)
343 -are modelled as specializations or technical subtypes.
344 -{{/info}}
345 -
346 -
347 347  Notes:
348 348  
349 349  * Most roles (READER, CONTRIBUTOR, TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR, REVIEWER, MODERATOR,
... ... @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@
373 373  * It may inherit some links from earlier scenarios, or start empty depending
374 374   on the change classification (cosmetic vs. conceptual).
375 375  * All verdicts for that scenario are recalculated and stored as new
376 -{{code}}VERDICT_VERSION{{/code}} entries.
312 + {{code}}VERDICT_VERSION{{/code}} entries.
377 377  
378 378  * REVIEW_ACTIONs are always attached to the **exact version** that was seen by
379 379   the reviewer. This preserves a faithful audit trail if data later changes.
... ... @@ -410,173 +410,3 @@
410 410  Federation-specific entities (such as {{code}}FEDERATION_NODE{{/code}},
411 411  replication logs, and trust rules) are described in the Federation &
412 412  Decentralization chapter and build on top of the core data model defined here.
413 -
414 -----
415 -
416 -== 1. Overall analysis & review of the data model ==
417 -
418 -=== 1.1 Strengths of the current design ===
419 -
420 -* (((
421 -**Identity vs. version pattern**
422 -Using base entities plus version entities (CLAIM + CLAIM_VERSION, SCENARIO + SCENARIO_VERSION, etc.) is exactly how modern knowledge systems handle:
423 -
424 -* auditability
425 -* time evolution
426 -* re-evaluation triggers
427 -* federation and partial replication
428 -)))
429 -* (((
430 -**Scenario-centric reasoning**
431 -Separating //Claim// (what people argue about) from //Scenario// (interpretive frame) is very aligned with “truth landscape” style systems:
432 -
433 -* Scenarios explain //why people disagree//.
434 -* Verdicts are tied to specific scenario versions → avoids mixing incompatible assumptions.
435 -)))
436 -* **Evidence and verdicts as first-class entities**
437 -Evidence is explicit, linked to scenarios, and verdicts are per scenario. This matches good practice from fact-checking, scientific assessment panels, and trust graphs.
438 -* (((
439 -**Cluster level (CLAIM_CLUSTER)**
440 -Grouping related claims avoids duplication and lets you:
441 -
442 -* reuse scenarios across paraphrases
443 -* share embeddings / semantic search
444 -* keep the system scalable as the corpus grows.
445 -)))
446 -* (((
447 -**Explicit review layer (REVIEW_ACTION, roles, etc.)**
448 -Separating “data” from “who reviewed what” keeps the model clean, and is exactly what you want for:
449 -
450 -* governance
451 -* permissions
452 -* audit trails
453 -* future trust scoring per user / role.
454 -)))
455 -
456 -----
457 -
458 -=== 1.2 Design decisions I’m locking in (based on our discussions) ===
459 -
460 -To make the model consistent and “state-of-the-art”, I will assume the following as //current intended design//:
461 -
462 -1. (((
463 -**Claims vs Scenarios**
464 -
465 -* CLAIM is the stable identity for “what people argue about”.
466 -* CLAIM_VERSION are individual phrasings / formulations / metadata.
467 -* (((
468 -SCENARIO belongs to a **CLAIM**, not to a specific CLAIM_VERSION.
469 -Rationale:
470 -
471 -* Many different phrasings share the //same// scenario.
472 -* You avoid duplicating scenarios per wording.
473 -)))
474 -* SCENARIO_VERSION holds detailed definitions, assumptions, boundaries, etc.
475 -)))
476 -1. (((
477 -**Version-specific reasoning**
478 -
479 -* **Verdicts** are always attached to SCENARIO_VERSION (not base SCENARIO).
480 -* **Evidence links** are between SCENARIO_VERSION and EVIDENCE_VERSION.
481 -→ This is what we agreed when we said //“SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK should link the respective versions instead”//.
482 -)))
483 -1. (((
484 -**Clusters**
485 -
486 -* CLAIM_CLUSTER groups Claims (semantically close claims).
487 -* It is visible in **both diagrams** (Core Data Model and Data Use).
488 -)))
489 -1. (((
490 -**Review vs data**
491 -
492 -* (((
493 -All review happens **on versioned entities**:
494 -
495 -* CLAIM_VERSION
496 -* SCENARIO_VERSION
497 -* EVIDENCE_VERSION
498 -* SCENARIO_EVIDENCE_LINK_VERSION
499 -* VERDICT_VERSION
500 -)))
501 -* REVIEW_ACTION is the generic log of //who// did //what// on //which version//.
502 -)))
503 -1. (((
504 -**Users & roles**
505 -
506 -* USER has an attribute (or a linked entity) that distinguishes **technical users** from normal accounts.
507 -* We //keep// TECHNICAL_USER as a specialisation of USER (strictly technical accounts).
508 -* All human & technical accounts can hold roles via USER_ROLE_MEMBERSHIP.
509 -* (((
510 -Roles include:
511 -
512 -* READER
513 -* CONTRIBUTOR
514 -* TRUSTED_CONTRIBUTOR
515 -* REVIEWER
516 -* MODERATOR
517 -* SYSTEM_ADMIN / MAINTAINER
518 -* FEDERATION_OPERATOR
519 -* FEDERATION_ADMIN
520 -(all present in the Data Use ERD, but as rows of ROLE rather than separate entities).
521 -)))
522 -)))
523 -
524 -----
525 -
526 -=== 1.3 Gaps / potential problems ===
527 -
528 -These are the main issues & missing areas I see:
529 -
530 -1. (((
531 -**Versioning text in chapter 5 is currently too thin (‘…’ placeholders)**
532 -
533 -* (((
534 -The spec does not yet //verbally// spell out:
535 -
536 -* the identity vs version pattern, systematically
537 -* how re-evaluation triggers are derived from version changes
538 -* how this aligns with federation (which versions are replicated where).
539 -)))
540 -)))
541 -1. (((
542 -**No explicit “provenance granularity” in the model**
543 -
544 -* (((
545 -EVIDENCE is a single entity. For more advanced use cases, you may later want:
546 -
547 -* EVIDENCE_SOURCE (the whole article/report/video)
548 -* EVIDENCE_FRAGMENT (specific paragraph/clip with its own reliability, quote, etc.)
549 -)))
550 -* For now, I’ll keep EVIDENCE/EVIDENCE_VERSION as is, but I’ll mention this as a possible extension.
551 -)))
552 -1. (((
553 -**Review target polymorphism**
554 -
555 -* (((
556 -REVIEW_ACTION can apply to multiple entity types. In the diagram this shows as multiple relationships:
557 -
558 -* CLAIM_VERSION → REVIEW_ACTION
559 -* SCENARIO_VERSION → REVIEW_ACTION
560 -* etc.
561 -)))
562 -* A more “pure” relational modeling would use a generic “subjectType + subjectId” or an intermediate “REVIEW_TARGET” table.
563 -* For readability, I’ll keep the simpler multi-edge representation and mention the polymorphism in text.
564 -)))
565 -1. (((
566 -**Federation details missing from core ERD**
567 -
568 -* There is no explicit FEDERATION_NODE / REPLICATION_LOG in the Data Model chapter.
569 -* This is ok for “core logical data model”, but I’ll add a short note that federation metadata is handled in the Federation chapter and via additional entities.
570 -)))
571 -1. (((
572 -**Automation / AKEL artifacts left implicit**
573 -
574 -* (((
575 -The Data Model chapter currently doesn’t describe:
576 -
577 -* AKEL task queues
578 -* extraction runs
579 -* model versions
580 -)))
581 -* That’s fine for now; I’ll just clarify that those belong to a “Processing / AKEL” submodel, not the core logical data model.
582 -)))