Feature/product platform foundation v0.62 #1
@@ -474,3 +474,51 @@ focused contribution
|
||||
### Decision: FINDINGS-DOMAIN-MODEL-JUSTIFIED
|
||||
|
||||
The distinction is clearly useful enough that focused→global integration should be designed around findings/provenance rather than raw turn outputs. The semantic gap between "what one answer contributed" and "what the investigation has found so far" is real and material.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Finding ↔ SituationGraph Reasoning Contract — August 2026
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Finding is a separate durable reasoning entity.** It is not itself a SituationGraph node.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Finding ↔ graph relationship is conceptually many-to-many.** One Finding may support/challenge multiple graph propositions. Multiple Findings may support/challenge one graph proposition.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Findings do not directly mutate the SituationGraph.** They are evidence carriers, not graph mutation agents.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **case/update remains authoritative for:**
|
||||
- graph node creation/update
|
||||
- resolving/reopening unknowns
|
||||
- graph confidence/status changes
|
||||
- activeUnknownNodeId
|
||||
- selectedQuestion
|
||||
- Current Understanding
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Trust model:** focused reasoning proposes Findings/evidence → user disposition affects standing → case/update independently evaluates → authoritative graph changes happen only through case/update.
|
||||
|
||||
6. **User dispositions** (Agree / Not quite / Not relevant) are semantic signals that INFORM global reasoning. They do not directly bind graph truth.
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Finding status and graph node status remain separate concepts.** One does not dictate the other.
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Relevance and confidence remain separate dimensions.** A Finding can be high-confidence but low-relevance, or vice versa.
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Low-relevance Findings may remain in provenance/evidence** without affecting active investigation priority.
|
||||
|
||||
10. **Findings may be reopened** when later evidence changes their relevance or standing.
|
||||
|
||||
11. **Current Understanding should ultimately be reconstructed** by case/update from globally eligible Findings + graph state, not directly from the latest focused result.
|
||||
|
||||
12. **Findings may influence but do not own:** active frontier, selectedQuestion. Only case/update sets these.
|
||||
|
||||
13. **Raw focused fields must not be blindly copied into graph mutations.** Case/update evaluates accumulated evidence through authoritative reasoning paths (reconciliation, branch interaction analysis, decision closure protection).
|
||||
|
||||
14. **Minimum conceptual handoff object is approximately:** Finding + disposition + provenance + relevance/standing + graph anchor. API/schema design is NOT yet settled.
|
||||
|
||||
### Unresolved implementation choices
|
||||
|
||||
- Finding schema
|
||||
- Finding IDs
|
||||
- contribution↔Finding mapping/clustering
|
||||
- confidence representation/scoring
|
||||
- reopening triggers
|
||||
- exact focused→global API/payload shape
|
||||
- UI presentation of Finding dispositions
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user