Canonical symbolic state and candidate → verify → commit authority

Assumptions

assumptions

• Ambiguity, synonymy, context dependence and self-contamination make language a poor sole carrier of state.

Claims

claims

• Text, tables, code, graphs, numbers and actions are different output projections of one canonical state.
• Inference/tool output → Candidate → Verify → Commit, never direct state mutation.

Predictions

predictions

• A no-provenance fact candidate is rejected before commit; two valid candidates on the same base version yield exactly one commit and one VersionConflict.

Falsification / failure conditions

falsification_conditions

• A strengthened baseline with direct mutable memory reproduces the same state-integrity outcomes at lower cost.

Known limitations

known_limitations

• A centralized application-level gate reproduces the tested semantics (R3); the remaining difference is where the obligation lives, not what can be computed.

Evidence

Relations

History and provenance

Canonical URL

https://evemisslab.com/ai/theory/THY-2026-0002/

Machine-readable

/ai/theory/THY-2026-0002/index.json

Snapshot

AI-SNAPSHOT-v0.1-fe85b9694a45

Provenance

source

EveMissLab research collection: Adaptive Epistemic Systems (真本體論13)

extracted_by

Splice (Claude Code), reading the canonical UTF-8 sources and each lab's own result reports

extracted_at

2026-09-11

generator

tools/extract_aes/extract.py

claim_boundary

status, evidence level and result type follow the source artifact's own stated claim boundary; nothing is upgraded beyond what the report supports