Compare commits
2 commits
e0422cea1a
...
3b92116d3d
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
|
3b92116d3d | ||
|
|
57ce21d920 |
35 changed files with 15 additions and 883 deletions
|
|
@ -1,131 +0,0 @@
|
|||
# Vida's Knowledge Frontier
|
||||
|
||||
**Last updated:** 2026-03-16 (first self-audit)
|
||||
|
||||
These are the gaps in Vida's health domain knowledge base, ranked by impact on active beliefs. Each gap is a contribution invitation — if you have evidence, experience, or analysis that addresses one of these, the collective wants it.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 1. Behavioral Health Infrastructure Mechanisms
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** Belief 2 — "80-90% of health outcomes are non-clinical" — depends on non-clinical interventions actually working at scale. The health KB has strong evidence that medical care explains only 10-20% of outcomes, but almost nothing about WHAT works to change the other 80-90%.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Community health worker program outcomes (ROI, scalability, retention)
|
||||
- Social prescribing mechanisms and evidence (UK Link Workers, international models)
|
||||
- Digital therapeutics for behavior change (post-PDT market failure — what survived?)
|
||||
- Behavioral economics of health (commitment devices, default effects, incentive design)
|
||||
- Food-as-medicine programs (Geisinger Fresh Food Farmacy, produce prescription ROI)
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- medical care explains only 10-20 percent of health outcomes...
|
||||
- SDOH interventions show strong ROI but adoption stalls...
|
||||
- social isolation costs Medicare 7 billion annually...
|
||||
- modernization dismantles family and community structures...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** RCTs or large-N evaluations of community-based health interventions. Cost-effectiveness analyses. Implementation science on what makes SDOH programs scale vs stall.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2. International and Comparative Health Systems
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** Every structural claim in the health KB is US-only. This limits generalizability and misses natural experiments that could strengthen or challenge the attractor state thesis.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Singapore's 3M system (Medisave/Medishield/Medifund) — consumer-directed with catastrophic coverage
|
||||
- Costa Rica's EBAIS primary care model — universal coverage at 8% of US per-capita spend
|
||||
- Japan's Long-Term Care Insurance — aging population, community-based care at scale
|
||||
- NHS England — what underfunding + wait times reveal about single-payer failure modes
|
||||
- Kerala's community health model — high outcomes at low GDP
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- the healthcare attractor state is a prevention-first system...
|
||||
- healthcare is a complex adaptive system requiring simple enabling rules...
|
||||
- four competing payer-provider models are converging toward value-based care...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** Comparative health system analyses. WHO/Commonwealth Fund cross-national data. Case studies of systems that achieved prevention-first economics.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 3. GLP-1 Second-Order Economics
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** GLP-1s are the largest therapeutic category launch in pharmaceutical history. One claim captures market size, but the downstream economic and behavioral effects are uncharted.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Long-term adherence data at population scale (current trials are 2-4 years)
|
||||
- Insurance coverage dynamics (employer vs Medicare vs cash-pay trajectories)
|
||||
- Impact on adjacent markets (bariatric surgery demand, metabolic syndrome treatment)
|
||||
- Manufacturing bottleneck economics (Novo/Lilly duopoly, biosimilar timeline)
|
||||
- Behavioral rebound after discontinuation (weight regain rates, metabolic reset)
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- GLP-1 receptor agonists are the largest therapeutic category launch...
|
||||
- the healthcare cost curve bends up through 2035...
|
||||
- consumer willingness to pay out of pocket for AI-enhanced care...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** Real-world adherence studies (not trial populations). Actuarial analyses of GLP-1 impact on total cost of care. Manufacturing capacity forecasts.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 4. Clinical AI Real-World Safety Data
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** Belief 5 — clinical AI safety risks — is grounded in theoretical mechanisms (human-in-the-loop degradation, benchmark vs clinical performance gap) but thin on deployment data.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Deployment accuracy vs benchmark accuracy (how much does performance drop in real clinical settings?)
|
||||
- Alert fatigue rates in AI-augmented clinical workflows
|
||||
- Liability incidents and near-misses from clinical AI deployments
|
||||
- Autonomous diagnosis failure modes (systematic biases, demographic performance gaps)
|
||||
- Clinician de-skilling longitudinal data (is the human-in-the-loop degradation measurable over years?)
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- human-in-the-loop clinical AI degrades to worse-than-AI-alone...
|
||||
- medical LLM benchmark performance does not translate to clinical impact...
|
||||
- AI diagnostic triage achieves 97 percent sensitivity...
|
||||
- healthcare AI regulation needs blank-sheet redesign...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** Post-deployment surveillance studies. FDA adverse event reports for AI/ML medical devices. Longitudinal studies of clinician performance with and without AI assistance.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 5. Space Health (Cross-Domain Bridge to Astra)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** Space medicine is a natural cross-domain connection that's completely unbuilt. Radiation biology, bone density loss, psychological isolation, and closed-loop life support all have terrestrial health parallels.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Radiation biology and cancer risk in long-duration spaceflight
|
||||
- Bone density and muscle atrophy countermeasures (pharmaceutical + exercise protocols)
|
||||
- Psychological health in isolation and confinement (Antarctic, submarine, ISS data)
|
||||
- Closed-loop life support as a model for self-sustaining health systems
|
||||
- Telemedicine in extreme environments (latency-tolerant protocols, autonomous diagnosis)
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- social isolation costs Medicare 7 billion annually...
|
||||
- the physician role shifts from information processor to relationship manager...
|
||||
- continuous health monitoring is converging on a multi-layer sensor stack...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** NASA Human Research Program publications. ESA isolation studies (SIRIUS, Mars-500). Telemedicine deployment data from remote/extreme environments.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 6. Health Narratives and Meaning (Cross-Domain Bridge to Clay)
|
||||
|
||||
**Why it matters:** The health KB asserts that 80-90% of outcomes are non-clinical, and that modernization erodes meaning-making structures. But the connection between narrative, identity, meaning, and health outcomes is uncharted.
|
||||
|
||||
**What's missing:**
|
||||
- Placebo and nocebo mechanisms — what the placebo effect reveals about narrative-driven physiology
|
||||
- Narrative identity in chronic illness — how patients' stories about their condition affect outcomes
|
||||
- Meaning-making as health intervention — Viktor Frankl to modern logotherapy evidence
|
||||
- Community and ritual as health infrastructure — religious attendance, group membership, and mortality
|
||||
- Deaths of despair as narrative failure — the connection between meaning-loss and self-destructive behavior
|
||||
|
||||
**Adjacent claims:**
|
||||
- Americas declining life expectancy is driven by deaths of despair...
|
||||
- modernization dismantles family and community structures...
|
||||
- social isolation costs Medicare 7 billion annually...
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence needed:** Psychoneuroimmunology research. Longitudinal studies on meaning/purpose and health outcomes. Comparative data on health outcomes in high-social-cohesion vs low-social-cohesion communities.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
*Generated from Vida's first self-audit (2026-03-16). These gaps are ranked by impact on active beliefs — Gap 1 affects the foundational claim that non-clinical factors drive health outcomes, which underpins the entire prevention-first thesis.*
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,138 +0,0 @@
|
|||
# Self-Audit Report: Vida
|
||||
**Date:** 2026-03-16
|
||||
**Domain:** health
|
||||
**Claims audited:** 44
|
||||
**Overall status:** WARNING
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Structural Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Schema Compliance: PASS
|
||||
- 44/44 files have all required frontmatter (type, domain, description, confidence, source, created)
|
||||
- 44/44 descriptions add meaningful context beyond the title
|
||||
- 3 files use non-standard extended fields (last_evaluated, depends_on, challenged_by, secondary_domains, tradition) — these are useful extensions but should be documented in schemas/claim.md if adopted collectively
|
||||
|
||||
### Orphan Ratio: CRITICAL — 74% (threshold: 15%)
|
||||
- 35 of 47 health claims have zero incoming wiki links from other claims or agent files
|
||||
- All 12 "connected" claims receive links only from inbox/archive source files, not from the knowledge graph
|
||||
- **This means the health domain is structurally isolated.** Claims link out to each other internally, but no other domain or agent file links INTO health claims.
|
||||
|
||||
**Classification of orphans:**
|
||||
- 15 AI/technology claims — should connect to ai-alignment domain
|
||||
- 8 business/market claims — should connect to internet-finance, teleological-economics
|
||||
- 8 policy/structural claims — should connect to mechanisms, living-capital
|
||||
- 4 foundational claims — should connect to critical-systems, cultural-dynamics
|
||||
|
||||
**Root cause:** Extraction-heavy, integration-light. Claims were batch-extracted (22 on Feb 17 alone) without a corresponding integration pass to embed them in the cross-domain graph.
|
||||
|
||||
### Link Health: PASS
|
||||
- No broken wiki links detected in claim bodies
|
||||
- All `wiki links` resolve to existing files
|
||||
|
||||
### Staleness: PASS (with caveat)
|
||||
- All claims created within the last 30 days (domain is new)
|
||||
- However, 22/44 claims cite evidence from a single source batch (Bessemer State of Health AI 2026). Source diversity is healthy at the domain level but thin at the claim level.
|
||||
|
||||
### Duplicate Detection: PASS
|
||||
- No semantic duplicates found
|
||||
- Two near-pairs worth monitoring:
|
||||
- "AI diagnostic triage achieves 97% sensitivity..." and "medical LLM benchmark performance does not translate to clinical impact..." — not duplicates but their tension should be explicit
|
||||
- "PACE demonstrates integrated care averts institutionalization..." and "PACE restructures costs from acute to chronic..." — complementary, not duplicates
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Epistemic Findings
|
||||
|
||||
### Unacknowledged Contradictions: 3 (HIGH PRIORITY)
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Prevention Economics Paradox**
|
||||
- Claim: "the healthcare attractor state...profits from health rather than sickness" (likely)
|
||||
- Claim: "PACE restructures costs from acute to chronic spending WITHOUT REDUCING TOTAL EXPENDITURE" (likely)
|
||||
- PACE is the closest real-world approximation of the attractor state (100% capitation, fully integrated, community-based). It shows quality/outcome improvement but cost-neutral economics. The attractor state thesis assumes prevention is profitable. PACE says it isn't — the value is clinical and social, not financial.
|
||||
- **The attractor claim's body addresses this briefly but the tension is buried, not explicit in either claim's frontmatter.**
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Jevons Paradox vs AI-Enabled Prevention**
|
||||
- Claim: "healthcare AI creates a Jevons paradox because adding capacity to sick care induces more demand" (likely)
|
||||
- Claim: "the healthcare attractor state" relies on "AI-augmented care delivery" for prevention
|
||||
- The Jevons claim asserts ALL healthcare AI optimizes sick care. The attractor state assumes AI can optimize prevention. Neither acknowledges the other.
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Cost Curve vs Attractor State Timeline**
|
||||
- Claim: "the healthcare cost curve bends UP through 2035" (likely)
|
||||
- Claim: "GLP-1s...net cost impact inflationary through 2035" (likely)
|
||||
- Claim: attractor state assumes prevention profitability
|
||||
- If costs are structurally inflationary through 2035, the prevention-first attractor can't achieve financial sustainability during the transition period. This timeline constraint isn't acknowledged.
|
||||
|
||||
### Confidence Miscalibrations: 3
|
||||
|
||||
**Overconfident (should downgrade):**
|
||||
1. "Big Food companies engineer addictive products by hacking evolutionary reward pathways" — rated `proven`, should be `likely`. The business practices are evidenced but "intentional hacking" of reward pathways is interpretation, not empirically proven via RCT.
|
||||
2. "AI scribes reached 92% provider adoption" — rated `proven`, should be `likely`. The 92% figure is "deploying, implementing, or piloting" (Bessemer), not proven adoption. The causal "because" clause is inferred.
|
||||
3. "CMS 2027 chart review exclusion targets vertical integration profit arbitrage" — rated `proven`, should be `likely`. CMS intent is inferred from policy mechanics, not explicitly documented.
|
||||
|
||||
**Underconfident (could upgrade):**
|
||||
1. "consumer willingness to pay out of pocket for AI-enhanced care" — rated `likely`, could be `proven`. RadNet study (N=747,604) showing 36% choosing $40 AI premium is large-scale empirical market behavior data.
|
||||
|
||||
### Belief Grounding: WARNING
|
||||
- Belief 1 ("healthspan is the binding constraint") — well-grounded in 7+ claims
|
||||
- Belief 2 ("80-90% of health outcomes are non-clinical") — grounded in `medical care explains 10-20%` (proven) but THIN on what actually works to change behavior. Only 1 claim touches SDOH interventions, 1 on social isolation. No claims on community health workers, social prescribing mechanisms, or behavioral economics of health.
|
||||
- Belief 3 ("structural misalignment") — well-grounded in CMS, payvidor, VBC claims
|
||||
- Belief 4 ("atoms-to-bits") — grounded in wearables + Function Health claims
|
||||
- Belief 5 ("clinical AI + safety risks") — grounded in human-in-the-loop degradation, benchmark vs clinical impact. But thin on real-world deployment safety data.
|
||||
|
||||
### Scope Issues: 3
|
||||
|
||||
1. "AI-first screening viable for ALL imaging and pathology" — evidence covers 14 CT conditions and radiology, not all imaging/pathology modalities. Universal is unwarranted.
|
||||
2. "the physician role SHIFTS from information processor to relationship manager" — stated as completed fact; evidence shows directional trend, not completed transformation.
|
||||
3. "the healthcare attractor state...PROFITS from health" — financial profitability language is stronger than PACE evidence supports. "Incentivizes health" would be more accurate.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Knowledge Gaps (ranked by impact on beliefs)
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Behavioral health infrastructure mechanisms** — Belief 2 depends on non-clinical interventions working at scale. Almost no claims about WHAT works: community health worker programs, social prescribing, digital therapeutics for behavior change. This is the single biggest gap.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **International/comparative health systems** — Zero non-US claims. Singapore 3M, Costa Rica EBAIS, Japan LTCI, NHS England are all in the archive but unprocessed. Limits the generalizability of every structural claim.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **GLP-1 second-order economics** — One claim on market size. Nothing on: adherence at scale, insurance coverage dynamics, impact on bariatric surgery demand, manufacturing bottlenecks, Novo/Lilly duopoly dynamics.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Clinical AI real-world safety data** — Belief 5 claims safety risks but evidence is thin. Need: deployment accuracy vs benchmark, alert fatigue rates, liability incidents, autonomous diagnosis failure modes.
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Space health** — Zero claims. Cross-domain bridge to Astra is completely unbuilt. Radiation biology, bone density, psychological isolation — all relevant to both space medicine and terrestrial health.
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Health narratives and meaning** — Cross-domain bridge to Clay is unbuilt. Placebo mechanisms, narrative identity in chronic illness, meaning-making as health intervention.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Domain Health
|
||||
|
||||
- **Internal linkage:** Dense — most health claims link to 2-5 other health claims
|
||||
- **Cross-domain linkage ratio:** ~5% (CRITICAL — threshold is 15%)
|
||||
- **Missing connections:**
|
||||
- health ↔ ai-alignment: 15 AI-related health claims, zero links to Theseus's domain
|
||||
- health ↔ internet-finance: VBC/CMS/GLP-1 economics claims, zero links to Rio's domain
|
||||
- health ↔ critical-systems: "healthcare is a complex adaptive system" claim, zero links to foundations/critical-systems/
|
||||
- health ↔ cultural-dynamics: deaths of despair, modernization claims, zero links to foundations/cultural-dynamics/
|
||||
- health ↔ space-development: zero claims, zero links
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Actions (prioritized)
|
||||
|
||||
### Critical
|
||||
1. **Resolve prevention economics contradiction** — Add `challenged_by` to attractor state claim pointing to PACE cost evidence. Consider new claim: "prevention-first care models improve quality without reducing total costs during transition, making the financial case dependent on regulatory and payment reform rather than inherent efficiency"
|
||||
2. **Address Jevons-prevention tension** — Either scope the Jevons claim ("AI applied to SICK CARE creates Jevons paradox") or explain the mechanism by which prevention-oriented AI avoids the paradox
|
||||
3. **Integration pass** — Batch PR adding incoming wiki links from core/, foundations/, and other domains/ to the 35 orphan claims. This is the highest-impact structural fix.
|
||||
|
||||
### High
|
||||
4. **Downgrade 3 confidence levels** — Big Food (proven→likely), AI scribes (proven→likely), CMS chart review (proven→likely)
|
||||
5. **Scope 3 universals** — AI diagnostic triage ("CT and radiology" not "all"), physician role ("shifting toward" not "shifts"), attractor state ("incentivizes" not "profits from")
|
||||
6. **Upgrade 1 confidence level** — Consumer willingness to pay (likely→proven)
|
||||
|
||||
### Medium
|
||||
7. **Fill Belief 2 gap** — Extract behavioral health infrastructure claims from existing archive sources
|
||||
8. **Build cross-domain links** — Start with health↔ai-alignment (15 natural connection points) and health↔critical-systems (complex adaptive system claim)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
*This report was generated using the self-audit skill (skills/self-audit.md). First audit of the health domain.*
|
||||
|
|
@ -39,12 +39,6 @@ The 60%→26% collapse in consumer enthusiasm for AI-generated creator content b
|
|||
|
||||
The binding constraint is specifically a moral disgust response in emotionally meaningful contexts, not just general acceptance issues. Journal of Business Research found that AI authorship triggers moral disgust even when content is identical to human-written versions. This suggests the gate is values-based rejection, not quality assessment.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-02-01-seedance-2-ai-video-benchmark]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Sora standalone app achieved 12 million downloads but retention below 8% at day 30 (vs 30%+ benchmark for successful apps), demonstrating that even among early adopters who actively sought AI video tools, usage hasn't created a compelling habit. This empirically confirms that capability has outpaced demand-side acceptance.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -25,12 +25,6 @@ This is more dangerous for incumbents than simple cost competition because they
|
|||
|
||||
The 2026 emergence of 'human-made' as a premium market label provides concrete evidence that quality definition now explicitly includes provenance and human creation as consumer-valued attributes distinct from production value. WordStream reports that 'the human-made label will be a selling point that content marketers use to signal the quality of their creation.' EY notes consumers want 'human-led storytelling, emotional connection, and credible reporting,' indicating quality now encompasses verifiable human authorship. PrismHaus reports brands using 'Human-Made' labels see higher conversion rates, demonstrating consumer preference reveals this new quality dimension through revealed preference (higher engagement/purchase). This extends the original claim by showing that quality definition has shifted to include verifiable human provenance as a distinct dimension orthogonal to traditional production metrics (cinematography, sound design, editing, etc.).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-02-01-seedance-2-ai-video-benchmark]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
The 2026 benchmark shows AI video quality (hand anatomy, lip-sync) has crossed the threshold where technical tells are no longer visible, yet consumer adoption remains low (Sora <8% D30 retention). This suggests that once quality becomes indistinguishable, the preference signal shifts to factors other than production value — likely authenticity, provenance, or use case fit rather than visual fidelity.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -29,12 +29,6 @@ A concrete early signal: a 9-person team reportedly produced an animated film fo
|
|||
|
||||
McKinsey projects $10B of US original content spend (approximately 20% of total) will be addressable by AI by 2030, with single-digit productivity improvements already visible in some use cases. However, AI-generated output is not yet at quality level to drive meaningful disruption in premium production.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-02-01-seedance-2-ai-video-benchmark]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Seedance 2.0 benchmark data from 2026 shows near-perfect hand anatomy scores (complex finger movements with zero visible hallucinations), native 2K resolution, and 4-15 second dynamic duration. Hand anatomy was the most visible quality barrier in 2024; crossing this threshold with phoneme-level lip-sync across 8+ languages indicates AI video has reached the technical capability for live-action substitution in many production contexts.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -28,12 +28,6 @@ The services ready to shift include primary care, outpatient specialist consults
|
|||
|
||||
This facility-to-home migration is the physical infrastructure layer of [[the healthcare attractor state is a prevention-first system where aligned payment continuous monitoring and AI-augmented care delivery create a flywheel that profits from health rather than sickness]]. If value-based care provides the payment alignment and continuous monitoring provides the data layer, the home is where these capabilities converge into actual care delivery. The 3-4x scaling requirement ($65B → $265B) matches the magnitude of the VBC payment transition tracked in [[value-based care transitions stall at the payment boundary because 60 percent of payments touch value metrics but only 14 percent bear full risk]].
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2021-02-00-mckinsey-facility-to-home-265-billion-shift]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
McKinsey projects the $265B shift requires a 3-4x increase in home care capacity from current $65B baseline. Johns Hopkins hospital-at-home demonstrates 19-30% cost savings vs. in-hospital care, while home-based heart failure management shows 52% lower costs. The enabling technology stack includes RPM market growing from $29B to $138B (2024-2033) at 19% CAGR, with AI in RPM growing 27.5% CAGR ($2B to $8.4B, 2024-2030). 71M Americans expected to use RPM by 2025. Demand signal: 94% of Medicare beneficiaries prefer home-based post-acute care, with 16% of 65+ respondents more likely to receive home health post-pandemic.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -27,12 +27,6 @@ This claim connects the technology layer ([[continuous health monitoring is conv
|
|||
|
||||
The atoms-to-bits conversion happens at the patient's home ([[healthcares defensible layer is where atoms become bits because physical-to-digital conversion generates the data that powers AI care while building patient trust that software alone cannot create]]), and the AI layer makes that data clinically useful ([[AI middleware bridges consumer wearable data to clinical utility because continuous data is too voluminous for direct clinician review]]).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2021-02-00-mckinsey-facility-to-home-265-billion-shift]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
McKinsey identifies RPM as the fastest-growing home healthcare end-use segment at 25.3% CAGR, with home healthcare specifically as the fastest-growing RPM application. The technology stack enables dialysis, post-acute care, long-term care, and infusions to become 'stitchable capabilities' that can shift home. COVID catalyzed permanent shift in care delivery expectations through telehealth adoption.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -31,12 +31,6 @@ For the Teleo pipeline specifically: when extract produces claims faster than ev
|
|||
|
||||
The tradeoff: AIMD is reactive rather than predictive, so it responds to load changes rather than anticipating them. For bursty workloads with predictable patterns, ML-based prediction might provision capacity faster. But for unpredictable workloads or systems where prediction accuracy is low, AIMD's simplicity and guaranteed stability are compelling.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-04-25-bournassenko-queueing-theory-cicd-pipelines]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
M/M/c queueing models provide theoretical foundation for why queue-state-based scaling works: closed-form solutions exist for wait times given arrival rates and server counts, meaning optimal worker allocation can be computed from observable queue depth without predicting future load.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -57,22 +57,16 @@ Dean's List treasury proposal passed despite requiring active market participati
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: 2025-01-14-futardio-proposal-should-deans-list-dao-update-the-liquidity-fee-structure | Added: 2026-03-15*
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-01-14-futardio-proposal-should-deans-list-dao-update-the-liquidity-fee-structure]] | Added: 2026-03-15*
|
||||
|
||||
Dean's List DAO fee structure proposal passed despite requiring traders to actively migrate to new pools and accept 20x higher fees (0.25% to 5%). The proposal explicitly acknowledged potential 20-30% volume decrease but passed anyway, suggesting the market priced the net treasury benefit (~$19k-25k annual growth) as worth the migration friction. This demonstrates that futarchy can approve proposals with significant user friction when the economic benefit is clear.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: 2025-01-14-futardio-proposal-should-deans-list-dao-update-the-liquidity-fee-structure | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-01-14-futardio-proposal-should-deans-list-dao-update-the-liquidity-fee-structure]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Dean's List DAO proposal passed with TWAP threshold requiring only 3% MCAP increase ($307,855 vs $298,889 baseline), suggesting the market viewed the fee increase as marginally positive but not strongly so. The conservative 3% threshold indicates either low participation or weak conviction despite clear revenue projections showing 20x fee increase.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2024-07-18-futardio-proposal-enhancing-the-deans-list-dao-economic-model]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
The Dean's List proposal passed futarchy governance despite requiring complex multi-step economic modeling (FDV projections, TWAP calculations, sell pressure estimates) that most token holders would not independently verify. The 5.33% projected FDV increase exceeded the 3% TWAP requirement, suggesting the proposal's passage reflected trust in the model rather than independent market validation of the buyback mechanics.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -28,12 +28,6 @@ For Teleo pipeline: if processing ~8 sources per extraction cycle (every 5 min)
|
|||
|
||||
More generally: λ = average sources per second, W = average extraction time. Total workers needed ≥ λ × W gives the minimum worker floor. Additional capacity rules (like square-root staffing) provide the safety margin above that floor.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-04-25-bournassenko-queueing-theory-cicd-pipelines]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
M/M/c queueing theory provides closed-form solutions for expected wait times given worker counts, enabling precise capacity planning beyond Little's Law's minimum floor. The framework connects arrival rate modeling to worker count optimization through explicit formulas that account for variance.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -44,16 +44,10 @@ Loyal's fundraise achieved 151x oversubscription ($75.9M committed vs $500K targ
|
|||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: 2025-11-14-futardio-launch-solomon | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-11-14-futardio-launch-solomon]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Solomon raised $102.9M committed against $2M target (51x oversubscription), closing at $8M final raise. This adds to the pattern of massive oversubscription on futarchy-governed launches, following earlier examples like Cult's $11.4M single-day raise.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (challenge)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-02-03-futardio-launch-hurupay]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Hurupay raised $2,003,593 against a $3,000,000 target (67% of goal) and entered 'Refunding' status, demonstrating that futarchy-governed fundraises can fail to meet targets. This contrasts with the 15x oversubscription pattern and suggests market mechanisms can reject projects even with demonstrated traction ($36M+ processed volume, $500K+ revenue, 30K+ users).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -27,12 +27,6 @@ Ward Whitt presents this as a fundamental result from multi-server queueing anal
|
|||
|
||||
This is observable in practice across industries: Amazon's fulfillment centers, telecom networks, and financial trading systems all exhibit this scaling behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2025-04-25-bournassenko-queueing-theory-cicd-pipelines]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
M/M/c queue analysis demonstrates that the marginal improvement of worker N+1 decreases as N grows, providing mathematical proof that safety margins scale sublinearly. This is a fundamental property of multi-server queues, not just an empirical observation.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -36,12 +36,6 @@ The model assumes consistent service demand (6 dApp reviews per month) and stabl
|
|||
|
||||
The proposal passed MetaDAO governance but represents a single implementation without long-term performance data. The 80% sell-off assumption is stated as "assumption" in the proposal itself, not empirically validated. No mechanism prevents citizens from selling more than 80% if they face liquidity pressure.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (extend)
|
||||
*Source: [[2024-07-18-futardio-proposal-enhancing-the-deans-list-dao-economic-model]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
The Dean's List DAO proposal demonstrates buyback mechanics with specific numbers: charging clients 2500 USDC per review, taking 20% DAO tax in USDC (500), using remaining 2000 USDC to purchase $DEAN tokens, then distributing purchased tokens to DAO citizens as payment. With 80% of recipients selling, the model claims net positive price action because buys exceed sells by 20%. Example shows 400 USDC daily purchases creating 80% increase in trading volume relative to baseline 500 USDC/day, with estimated 5.33% FDV increase from $337,074 to $355,028 monthly.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -25,12 +25,6 @@ This pattern — technological capability outpacing institutional design — rec
|
|||
|
||||
The governance gap framing assumes governance must precede activity, but historically many governance regimes emerged from practice rather than design — maritime law, internet governance, and aviation regulation all evolved alongside the activities they governed. Counter: the speed differential is qualitatively different for space. Maritime law had centuries to evolve; internet governance emerged over decades but still lags (no global data governance framework exists). Space combines the speed of technology advancement with the lethality of the environment — governance failure in space doesn't produce market inefficiency, it produces Kessler syndrome or lethal infrastructure conflicts. The design window is compressed by the exponential pace of capability development.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (confirm)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-03-00-artemis-program-restructuring]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Artemis III descoped from lunar landing to LEO-only test, pushing human lunar landing to 2028 (56 years after Apollo 17). This represents compounding institutional delays while commercial capabilities (SpaceX Starship/HLS) advance on faster timelines, providing concrete evidence of the widening execution gap.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -26,12 +26,6 @@ The five layers form a chain-link system: propellant depots without ISRU are une
|
|||
|
||||
The investment framework this implies: position along the dependency chain that builds toward this attractor state. [[power is the binding constraint on all space operations because every capability from ISRU to manufacturing to life support is power-limited]], making power infrastructure foundational. Water extraction is enabling. Propellant depots are connective. Manufacturing platforms are the value-capture layer.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Additional Evidence (challenge)
|
||||
*Source: [[2026-03-00-artemis-program-restructuring]] | Added: 2026-03-16*
|
||||
|
||||
Artemis restructuring pushes first lunar landing to 2028 and reveals that lunar ISRU deployment is blocked by insufficient resource knowledge despite technology being at TRL 5-6. NASA states 'a resilient resource exploration campaign is needed to understand and map lunar water before commercial extraction.' This adds a critical path dependency (resource prospecting) that precedes ISRU infrastructure deployment.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
Relevant Notes:
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -43,7 +43,6 @@ CFTC-designated contract market for event-based trading. USD-denominated, KYC-re
|
|||
|
||||
- **2026-01-XX** — Targeting $20B valuation alongside Polymarket as prediction market duopoly emerges
|
||||
- **2025-XX-XX** — Positioned for retail adoption through traditional broker integration with native CFTC approval
|
||||
- **2026-02-19** — Tennessee federal court ruled in Kalshi's favor, finding sports contracts are 'swaps' under CEA exclusive jurisdiction and conflict preemption applies. Circuit split emerges as Nevada, Massachusetts, and Maryland courts rule against federal preemption.
|
||||
## Competitive Position
|
||||
- **Regulation-first**: Only CFTC-designated prediction market exchange. Institutional credibility.
|
||||
- **vs Polymarket**: Different market — Kalshi targets mainstream/institutional users who won't touch crypto. Polymarket targets crypto-native users who want permissionless market creation. Both grew massively post-2024 election.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "m-m-c-queue-worker-scaling-exhibits-diminishing-returns-because-marginal-wait-time-reduction-decreases-as-server-count-increases.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 1,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 3,
|
||||
"rejected": 1,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"m-m-c-queue-worker-scaling-exhibits-diminishing-returns-because-marginal-wait-time-reduction-decreases-as-server-count-increases.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"m-m-c-queue-worker-scaling-exhibits-diminishing-returns-because-marginal-wait-time-reduction-decreases-as-server-count-increases.md:stripped_wiki_link:multi-server-queueing-systems-exhibit-economies-of-scale-bec",
|
||||
"m-m-c-queue-worker-scaling-exhibits-diminishing-returns-because-marginal-wait-time-reduction-decreases-as-server-count-increases.md:stripped_wiki_link:square-root-staffing-principle-achieves-economies-of-scale-i"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"m-m-c-queue-worker-scaling-exhibits-diminishing-returns-because-marginal-wait-time-reduction-decreases-as-server-count-increases.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "verified-launch-trust-layer-solves-permissionless-curation-tradeoff-through-reputation-routing.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "revenue-cadence-forces-permissionless-transition-through-feast-or-famine-dynamics.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 2,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 6,
|
||||
"rejected": 2,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"verified-launch-trust-layer-solves-permissionless-curation-tradeoff-through-reputation-routing.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"verified-launch-trust-layer-solves-permissionless-curation-tradeoff-through-reputation-routing.md:stripped_wiki_link:futarchy-governed-permissionless-launches-require-brand-sepa",
|
||||
"verified-launch-trust-layer-solves-permissionless-curation-tradeoff-through-reputation-routing.md:stripped_wiki_link:cryptos-primary-use-case-is-capital-formation-not-payments-o",
|
||||
"revenue-cadence-forces-permissionless-transition-through-feast-or-famine-dynamics.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"revenue-cadence-forces-permissionless-transition-through-feast-or-famine-dynamics.md:stripped_wiki_link:MetaDAO-is-the-futarchy-launchpad-on-Solana-where-projects-r",
|
||||
"revenue-cadence-forces-permissionless-transition-through-feast-or-famine-dynamics.md:stripped_wiki_link:internet-capital-markets-compress-fundraising-from-months-to"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"verified-launch-trust-layer-solves-permissionless-curation-tradeoff-through-reputation-routing.md:missing_attribution_extractor",
|
||||
"revenue-cadence-forces-permissionless-transition-through-feast-or-famine-dynamics.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,35 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "mainstream-first-acquisition-funnels-outperform-crypto-first-funnels-for-community-owned-IP.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "cultural-penetration-metrics-can-exceed-revenue-by-orders-of-magnitude-when-virality-precedes-monetization.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 2,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 5,
|
||||
"rejected": 2,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"mainstream-first-acquisition-funnels-outperform-crypto-first-funnels-for-community-owned-IP.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"mainstream-first-acquisition-funnels-outperform-crypto-first-funnels-for-community-owned-IP.md:stripped_wiki_link:progressive-validation-through-community-building-reduces-de",
|
||||
"mainstream-first-acquisition-funnels-outperform-crypto-first-funnels-for-community-owned-IP.md:stripped_wiki_link:community-ownership-accelerates-growth-through-aligned-evang",
|
||||
"cultural-penetration-metrics-can-exceed-revenue-by-orders-of-magnitude-when-virality-precedes-monetization.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"cultural-penetration-metrics-can-exceed-revenue-by-orders-of-magnitude-when-virality-precedes-monetization.md:stripped_wiki_link:information-cascades-create-power-law-distributions-in-cultu"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"mainstream-first-acquisition-funnels-outperform-crypto-first-funnels-for-community-owned-IP.md:missing_attribution_extractor",
|
||||
"cultural-penetration-metrics-can-exceed-revenue-by-orders-of-magnitude-when-virality-precedes-monetization.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "ai-video-generation-adoption-is-demand-constrained-not-capability-constrained-as-evidenced-by-low-retention-despite-quality-threshold-crossing.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 1,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 3,
|
||||
"rejected": 1,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"ai-video-generation-adoption-is-demand-constrained-not-capability-constrained-as-evidenced-by-low-retention-despite-quality-threshold-crossing.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"ai-video-generation-adoption-is-demand-constrained-not-capability-constrained-as-evidenced-by-low-retention-despite-quality-threshold-crossing.md:stripped_wiki_link:GenAI adoption in entertainment will be gated by consumer ac",
|
||||
"ai-video-generation-adoption-is-demand-constrained-not-capability-constrained-as-evidenced-by-low-retention-despite-quality-threshold-crossing.md:stripped_wiki_link:consumer definition of quality is fluid and revealed through"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"ai-video-generation-adoption-is-demand-constrained-not-capability-constrained-as-evidenced-by-low-retention-despite-quality-threshold-crossing.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "lunar-isru-deployment-blocked-by-resource-knowledge-gap-not-technology-readiness.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "institutional-space-programs-slip-timelines-while-commercial-capabilities-accelerate-creating-widening-execution-gap.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 2,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 2,
|
||||
"rejected": 2,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"lunar-isru-deployment-blocked-by-resource-knowledge-gap-not-technology-readiness.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"institutional-space-programs-slip-timelines-while-commercial-capabilities-accelerate-creating-widening-execution-gap.md:set_created:2026-03-16"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"lunar-isru-deployment-blocked-by-resource-knowledge-gap-not-technology-readiness.md:missing_attribution_extractor",
|
||||
"institutional-space-programs-slip-timelines-while-commercial-capabilities-accelerate-creating-widening-execution-gap.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 1,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 4,
|
||||
"rejected": 1,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md:stripped_wiki_link:futarchy-governed permissionless launches require brand sepa",
|
||||
"curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md:stripped_wiki_link:ownership coins primary value proposition is investor protec",
|
||||
"curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md:stripped_wiki_link:cryptos primary use case is capital formation not payments o"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"curated-launchpads-capture-disproportionate-capital-despite-lower-volume-because-quality-filtering-concentrates-investor-demand.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -1,36 +0,0 @@
|
|||
{
|
||||
"rejected_claims": [
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "phygital-distribution-creates-negative-customer-acquisition-cost-when-physical-products-function-as-onboarding-tools-for-digital-ecosystems.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
{
|
||||
"filename": "community-brand-value-can-decouple-from-token-value-when-ownership-operates-through-cultural-participation-rather-than-financial-instruments.md",
|
||||
"issues": [
|
||||
"missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
}
|
||||
],
|
||||
"validation_stats": {
|
||||
"total": 2,
|
||||
"kept": 0,
|
||||
"fixed": 6,
|
||||
"rejected": 2,
|
||||
"fixes_applied": [
|
||||
"phygital-distribution-creates-negative-customer-acquisition-cost-when-physical-products-function-as-onboarding-tools-for-digital-ecosystems.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"phygital-distribution-creates-negative-customer-acquisition-cost-when-physical-products-function-as-onboarding-tools-for-digital-ecosystems.md:stripped_wiki_link:giving-away-the-commoditized-layer-to-capture-value-on-the-s",
|
||||
"phygital-distribution-creates-negative-customer-acquisition-cost-when-physical-products-function-as-onboarding-tools-for-digital-ecosystems.md:stripped_wiki_link:the-media-attractor-state-is-community-filtered-IP-with-AI-c",
|
||||
"community-brand-value-can-decouple-from-token-value-when-ownership-operates-through-cultural-participation-rather-than-financial-instruments.md:set_created:2026-03-16",
|
||||
"community-brand-value-can-decouple-from-token-value-when-ownership-operates-through-cultural-participation-rather-than-financial-instruments.md:stripped_wiki_link:community-ownership-accelerates-growth-through-aligned-evang",
|
||||
"community-brand-value-can-decouple-from-token-value-when-ownership-operates-through-cultural-participation-rather-than-financial-instruments.md:stripped_wiki_link:ownership-alignment-turns-network-effects-from-extractive-to"
|
||||
],
|
||||
"rejections": [
|
||||
"phygital-distribution-creates-negative-customer-acquisition-cost-when-physical-products-function-as-onboarding-tools-for-digital-ecosystems.md:missing_attribution_extractor",
|
||||
"community-brand-value-can-decouple-from-token-value-when-ownership-operates-through-cultural-participation-rather-than-financial-instruments.md:missing_attribution_extractor"
|
||||
]
|
||||
},
|
||||
"model": "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5",
|
||||
"date": "2026-03-16"
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
@ -7,13 +7,9 @@ date: 2021-02-01
|
|||
domain: health
|
||||
secondary_domains: []
|
||||
format: report
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
tags: [home-health, hospital-at-home, care-delivery, facility-shift, mckinsey, senior-care]
|
||||
processed_by: vida
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["home-based-care-could-capture-265-billion-in-medicare-spending-by-2025-through-hospital-at-home-remote-monitoring-and-post-acute-shift.md", "rpm-technology-stack-enables-facility-to-home-care-migration-through-ai-middleware-that-converts-continuous-data-into-clinical-utility.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -58,16 +54,3 @@ extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[continuous health monitoring is converging on a multi-layer sensor stack of ambient wearables periodic patches and environmental sensors processed through AI middleware]]
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Connects the care delivery transition to the technology layer the KB already describes. Grounds the atoms-to-bits thesis in senior care economics.
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: The technology-enabling-care-site-shift narrative is more extractable than the dollar figure alone.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Up to $265 billion in Medicare care services (25% of total cost of care) could shift from facilities to home by 2025
|
||||
- Current home-based care serves approximately $65B, requiring 3-4x capacity increase
|
||||
- Johns Hopkins hospital-at-home program achieves 19-30% cost savings vs. in-hospital care
|
||||
- Home care for heart failure patients shows 52% lower costs in systematic review
|
||||
- 16% of 65+ respondents more likely to receive home health post-pandemic (McKinsey Consumer Health Insights, June 2021)
|
||||
- 94% of Medicare beneficiaries prefer home-based post-acute care
|
||||
- RPM market projected to grow from $29B to $138B (2024-2033) at 19% CAGR
|
||||
- AI in RPM market projected to grow from $2B to $8.4B (2024-2030) at 27.5% CAGR
|
||||
- Home healthcare is fastest-growing RPM end-use segment at 25.3% CAGR
|
||||
- 71M Americans expected to use RPM by 2025
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,13 +6,9 @@ url: "https://www.futard.io/proposal/5c2XSWQ9rVPge2Umoz1yenZcAwRaQS5bC4i4w87B1WU
|
|||
date: 2024-07-18
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: data
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana, governance]
|
||||
event_type: proposal
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["treasury-buyback-model-creates-constant-buy-pressure-by-converting-revenue-to-governance-token-purchases.md", "futarchy-proposals-with-favorable-economics-can-fail-due-to-participation-friction-not-market-disagreement.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposal Details
|
||||
|
|
@ -150,13 +146,3 @@ This way we create volume (3600 \$USDC volume) and the price action is always po
|
|||
- Autocrat version: 0.3
|
||||
- Completed: 2024-07-22
|
||||
- Ended: 2024-07-22
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO had FDV of $337,074 and daily trading volume of $500 as of July 2024
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO charges 2500 USDC per dApp review
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO proposal assumed 6 dApp reviews per month (15,000 USDC monthly revenue)
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO circulating supply: 100,000,000 $DEAN tokens
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO $DEAN price was $0.00337 at proposal time
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO proposal set 20% DAO tax rate with remainder used for token buybacks
|
||||
- The Dean's List DAO proposal estimated 80% of paid DAO citizens would sell their $DEAN tokens
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,12 +6,8 @@ url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.18705
|
|||
date: 2025-04-25
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: paper
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
tags: [pipeline-architecture, operations-research, queueing-theory, ci-cd, M/M/c-queue]
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["littles-law-provides-minimum-worker-capacity-floor-for-pipeline-systems-but-requires-buffer-margin-for-variance.md", "multi-server-queueing-systems-exhibit-economies-of-scale-because-safety-margin-grows-sublinearly-with-system-size.md", "aimd-worker-scaling-requires-only-queue-state-observation-not-load-prediction-making-it-simpler-than-ml-based-autoscaling.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# On Queueing Theory for Large-Scale CI/CD Pipelines Optimization
|
||||
|
|
@ -31,10 +27,3 @@ Academic paper applying classical M/M/c queueing theory to model CI/CD pipeline
|
|||
Direct parallel: our extract/eval pipeline IS a multi-stage CI/CD-like system. Sources arrive (Poisson-ish), workers process them (variable service times), and queue depth determines throughput. The M/M/c framework gives us closed-form solutions for expected wait times given worker counts.
|
||||
|
||||
Key insight: M/M/c queues show that adding workers has diminishing returns — the marginal improvement of worker N+1 decreases as N grows. This means there's an optimal worker count beyond which additional workers waste compute without meaningfully reducing queue wait times.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- M/M/c queues model Poisson arrivals, exponential service times, and c servers
|
||||
- Classical queueing theory provides closed-form solutions for expected wait times in multi-server systems
|
||||
- The paper addresses bottleneck formation in high-volume shared infrastructure pipelines
|
||||
- Framework integrates theoretical queueing analysis with practical optimization for dynamic scaling
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,13 +6,9 @@ url: "https://www.futard.io/launch/H5ng9t1tPRvGx8QoLFjjuXKdkUjicNXiADFdqB6t8ifJ"
|
|||
date: 2026-01-01
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: data
|
||||
status: null-result
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana]
|
||||
event_type: launch
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
extraction_notes: "LLM returned 0 claims, 0 rejected by validator"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Launch Details
|
||||
|
|
@ -29,10 +25,3 @@ extraction_notes: "LLM returned 0 claims, 0 rejected by validator"
|
|||
- Token: P2P (P2P)
|
||||
- Token mint: `P2PXup1ZvMpCDkJn3PQxtBYgxeCSfH39SFeurGSmeta`
|
||||
- Version: v0.7
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- P2P launched on Futard.io on 2026-01-01 with $6M funding target
|
||||
- P2P uses Autocrat v0.7 for futarchy governance
|
||||
- P2P token mint address is P2PXup1ZvMpCDkJn3PQxtBYgxeCSfH39SFeurGSmeta
|
||||
- Launch address is H5ng9t1tPRvGx8QoLFjjuXKdkUjicNXiADFdqB6t8ifJ
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,14 +6,10 @@ url: https://blockworks.co/news/rangers-ico-metadao
|
|||
date: 2026-02-00
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
secondary_domains: []
|
||||
format: report
|
||||
status: null-result
|
||||
format: article
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
tags: [metadao, permissionless, curation, launchpad, strategic-reset, mechanism-design]
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
extraction_notes: "LLM returned 2 claims, 2 rejected by validator"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -57,11 +53,3 @@ MetaDAO has publicly debated whether to preserve curated launches or move to per
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[Teleocap makes capital formation permissionless by letting anyone propose investment terms while AI agents evaluate debate and futarchy determines funding]]
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: The curated → permissionless transition with verified trust layer is a novel mechanism design. Revenue cadence problem validates why permissionless is necessary. The "DAO of DAOs" vision directly relates to MetaDAO's platform thesis.
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on (1) verified launch as mechanism design (reputation trust + permissionless infrastructure), (2) revenue cadence as evidence for permissionless necessity, (3) "DAO of DAOs" vision as attractor state.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- MetaDAO generated ~$2.4M total revenue since Futarchy AMM went live (Oct 10, 2025)
|
||||
- 60% of MetaDAO revenue from Futarchy AMM, 40% from Meteora LP position
|
||||
- MetaDAO revenue declined sharply since mid-December 2025 as ICO activity slowed
|
||||
- MetaDAO's verified launch system proposed as 'like blue tick on X'
|
||||
- Two key catalysts for MetaDAO: permissionless launches + Colosseum's STAMP
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -7,14 +7,10 @@ date: 2026-02-01
|
|||
domain: entertainment
|
||||
secondary_domains: [internet-finance]
|
||||
format: report
|
||||
status: null-result
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
tags: [pudgy-penguins, community-owned-IP, tokenized-culture, mainstream-first, Web3-entertainment, IPO]
|
||||
flagged_for_rio: ["Token economics of community-owned IP at public market scale — PENGU tokenomics, Pengu ETF, IPO pathway"]
|
||||
processed_by: clay
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
extraction_notes: "LLM returned 2 claims, 2 rejected by validator"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -53,20 +49,3 @@ CoinDesk Research deep-dive on Pudgy Penguins as a blueprint for tokenized cultu
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[community ownership accelerates growth through aligned evangelism not passive holding]]
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Most comprehensive data set on community-owned IP at scale; the mainstream-first strategy is a specific innovation worth capturing as a claim
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the STRATEGY (mainstream-first funnel) and the TENSION (IPO vs community ownership). The numbers validate existing claims but the strategy and tension are novel.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins generated $13M+ in physical retail revenue through Walmart, Target, and Walgreens
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins sold 1M+ physical units
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins achieved 123% CAGR through 2025
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins has 28.5K GIPHY uploads generating 65.1B views
|
||||
- PENGU token was airdropped to 6M+ wallets in December 2024
|
||||
- PENGU has 7%+ of meme token CEX volume share
|
||||
- 710M PENGU tokens unlock monthly for 36 months starting December 2025
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins FDV is ~$1.1B at ~22x revenue
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins distributed ~$1M in royalties to NFT holders
|
||||
- Pudgy Party achieved 500K+ downloads in 2 weeks
|
||||
- Pudgy World has 160K users
|
||||
- SEC acknowledged Pengu ETF structure in July 2025
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins targets 2027 IPO
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins is in 2000 Walmart stores and 2000 Walgreens locations
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -7,13 +7,9 @@ date: 2026-02-01
|
|||
domain: entertainment
|
||||
secondary_domains: []
|
||||
format: report
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
tags: [ai-video-generation, seedance, production-costs, quality-threshold, capability]
|
||||
processed_by: clay
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["non-ATL production costs will converge with the cost of compute as AI replaces labor across the production chain.md", "GenAI adoption in entertainment will be gated by consumer acceptance not technology capability.md", "consumer definition of quality is fluid and revealed through preference not fixed by production value.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -63,10 +59,3 @@ Aggregated benchmark data on the leading AI video generation models in 2026 (See
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: `non-ATL production costs will converge with the cost of compute as AI replaces labor across the production chain`
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: The hand anatomy benchmark crossing signals that the quality threshold for realistic video has been substantially cleared — which shifts the remaining barrier to consumer acceptance (demand-side) and creative direction (human judgment), not raw capability.
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: The Sora retention data (supply without demand) is the most extractable insight. A claim about AI video tool adoption being demand-constrained despite supply capability would be new to the KB.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Seedance 2.0 technical specs: 2048x1080 landscape / 1080x2048 portrait native resolution, 4-15 second dynamic duration, 30% faster than 1.5 Pro
|
||||
- Benchmark methodology: 50+ generations per model, identical 15-category prompt set, 4 seconds at 720p/24fps, rated 0-10 on 6 dimensions by 2 independent reviewers
|
||||
- Kling 3.0 rated best for ease of use in straightforward video generation
|
||||
- Seedance 2.0 rated best for precise creative control
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -6,13 +6,9 @@ url: "https://www.futard.io/launch/HT3ScC7gyo3zTn95s9jR7J3ez5u8HrRfFwD33YjMHLy3"
|
|||
date: 2026-02-03
|
||||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
format: data
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
tags: [futardio, metadao, futarchy, solana]
|
||||
event_type: launch
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["metadao-ico-platform-demonstrates-15x-oversubscription-validating-futarchy-governed-capital-formation.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Launch Details
|
||||
|
|
@ -241,15 +237,3 @@ Cayman SPC Agreement: [Formation Summary](https://cybercorps.metalex.tech/metada
|
|||
- Token mint: `HURUsdbnMfQSi6khLigf5As8wh2CGNnS2fxHDDXCmeta`
|
||||
- Version: v0.7
|
||||
- Closed: 2026-02-07
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Hurupay processed $36M+ in total transaction volume over 12 months
|
||||
- Hurupay grew from $1.8M/month to $7.2M/month in 6 months (32% MoM growth)
|
||||
- Hurupay has 30,000+ users across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the U.S.
|
||||
- Hurupay generated $500K+ in revenue
|
||||
- Hurupay raised $2,003,593 against $3,000,000 target on Futardio (Feb 2026)
|
||||
- Hurupay token allocation: 39.02% ICO, 11.31% liquidity, 42.66% team (3-year lockup), 7% previous investors (2-year vest)
|
||||
- Hurupay monthly spending allowance: $250K
|
||||
- Hurupay DAO configuration: 300bps pass threshold, 1.5M HURU stake requirement, 3-day proposal duration
|
||||
- Foreign exchange is a $6.5T/day market
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -7,13 +7,9 @@ date: 2026-03-00
|
|||
domain: space-development
|
||||
secondary_domains: []
|
||||
format: article
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
tags: [artemis, nasa, sls, lunar-landing, isru, timeline-slip, governance-gap]
|
||||
processed_by: astra
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
enrichments_applied: ["the 30-year space economy attractor state is a cislunar industrial system with propellant networks lunar ISRU orbital manufacturing and partial life support closure.md", "space governance gaps are widening not narrowing because technology advances exponentially while institutional design advances linearly.md"]
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -43,11 +39,3 @@ This represents a significant restructuring from earlier plans where Artemis III
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[the 30-year space economy attractor state is a cislunar industrial system with propellant networks lunar ISRU orbital manufacturing and partial life support closure]]
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Artemis restructuring pushes lunar landing to 2028 and reveals ISRU resource knowledge gap — both affect attractor state timeline
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: Extract the ISRU resource knowledge gap as a NEW constraint not currently in KB (technology readiness ≠ deployment readiness when you don't know where the resource is)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Artemis II crew: Wiseman, Glover, Koch (NASA) + Hansen (CSA)
|
||||
- Artemis II is a 10-day crewed lunar flyby mission
|
||||
- Artemis II rolled back to VAB on February 25, 2026 due to helium flow issue
|
||||
- Multiple ISRU prototypes at TRL 5-6: Carbothermal reactor, IPEx excavator, PVEx volatile extractor
|
||||
- Artemis V planned for late 2028 as second lunar landing
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -7,12 +7,9 @@ date: 2026-03-00
|
|||
domain: internet-finance
|
||||
secondary_domains: []
|
||||
format: market-analysis
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
tags: [solana, launchpads, pump-fun, metadao, capital-formation, token-launches, competitive-landscape]
|
||||
processed_by: rio
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -55,15 +52,3 @@ MetaDAO and Solanium are positioned as solutions — MetaDAO through futarchy pr
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: [[futarchy-governed permissionless launches require brand separation to manage reputational liability]]
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Competitive landscape data positions MetaDAO's futarchy model against permissionless alternatives — survival rate data is the strongest argument for curation
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: Focus on the curation vs permissionless spectrum as a market structure claim — what does the 9M tokens / <0.5% survival rate tell us about where value accrues in capital formation?
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Pump.fun generated $700M+ revenue since January 2024
|
||||
- Pump.fun launched 11M+ tokens
|
||||
- Pump.fun represented 70% of all Solana token launches at peak
|
||||
- Pump.fun bonding curve model: 1B tokens per launch, 800M to bonding curve
|
||||
- <0.5% of Pump.fun tokens survive 30 days
|
||||
- MetaDAO conducted 8 ICOs raising $25.6M with 15x oversubscription
|
||||
- Over 9 million tokens were launched on Solana in 2025
|
||||
- Bags.fm offers 1% perpetual revenue share on trading volume
|
||||
- Magic Eden operates NFT-focused launchpad with high selectivity
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -7,12 +7,9 @@ date: 2026-03-01
|
|||
domain: entertainment
|
||||
secondary_domains: [internet-finance]
|
||||
format: analysis
|
||||
status: enrichment
|
||||
status: unprocessed
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
tags: [pudgy-penguins, retail-distribution, phygital, community-ip, ipo, web3-entertainment]
|
||||
processed_by: clay
|
||||
processed_date: 2026-03-16
|
||||
extraction_model: "anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Content
|
||||
|
|
@ -61,12 +58,3 @@ Aggregated from multiple March 2026 sources on Pudgy Penguins' performance and s
|
|||
PRIMARY CONNECTION: community ownership accelerates growth through aligned evangelism not passive holding
|
||||
WHY ARCHIVED: Most complete current data on retail-first distribution bypass strategy. The PENGU token decline vs retail growth divergence is a critical signal about which ownership mechanisms actually work.
|
||||
EXTRACTION HINT: The token price decline is NOT a failure of the community thesis — it's a REFINEMENT. Community ownership may function through brand loyalty and retail economics rather than token economics. This is a significant scoping insight for Belief 5.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Key Facts
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins retail distribution: 10,000+ locations including 3,100 Walmart stores as of 2026
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins revenue: $13M (2024), $50-60M (2025), $120M (2026 target)
|
||||
- PENGU token: launched Dec 2024 at $0.037, peaked $0.0574, trading at $0.0064-0.0071 in March 2026 (88.92% decline)
|
||||
- Pudgy Penguins GIPHY views: 65.1 billion (2x Disney's nearest competitor)
|
||||
- Vibes TCG: 4M cards moved by early 2026
|
||||
- Valentine's Day 2026 campaign: $50K daily retail sales, 15x ROAS
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -1,150 +0,0 @@
|
|||
# Skill: Self-Audit
|
||||
|
||||
Periodic self-examination of an agent's knowledge base for inconsistencies, weaknesses, and drift. Every agent runs this on their own domain.
|
||||
|
||||
## When to Use
|
||||
|
||||
- Every 50 claims added to your domain (condition-based trigger)
|
||||
- Monthly if claim volume is low
|
||||
- After a major belief update (cascade from upstream claim changes)
|
||||
- When preparing to publish positions (highest-stakes output deserves freshest audit)
|
||||
- On request from Leo or Cory
|
||||
|
||||
## Principle: Detection, Not Remediation
|
||||
|
||||
Self-audit is read-only. You detect problems and report them. You do NOT auto-fix.
|
||||
|
||||
Fixes go through the standard PR process. This prevents the over-automation failure mode where silent corrections introduce new errors. The audit produces a report; the report drives PRs.
|
||||
|
||||
## Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 1: Structural Scan (deterministic, automated)
|
||||
|
||||
Run these checks on all claims in your domain (`domains/{your-domain}/`):
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Schema compliance**
|
||||
- Every file has required frontmatter: `type`, `domain`, `description`, `confidence`, `source`, `created`
|
||||
- `confidence` is one of: `proven`, `likely`, `experimental`, `speculative`
|
||||
- `domain` matches the folder it lives in
|
||||
- Description adds information beyond the title (not a restatement)
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Orphan detection**
|
||||
- Build incoming-link index: for each claim, which other claims link TO it via `title`
|
||||
- Claims with 0 incoming links and created > 7 days ago are orphans
|
||||
- Classify: "leaf contributor" (has outgoing links, no incoming) vs "truly isolated" (no links either direction)
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Link health**
|
||||
- Every `wiki link` in the body should resolve to an actual file
|
||||
- Dangling links = either the target was renamed/deleted, or the link is aspirational
|
||||
- Report: list of broken links with the file they appear in
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Staleness check**
|
||||
- Claims older than 180 days in fast-moving domains (health, ai-alignment, internet-finance)
|
||||
- Claims older than 365 days in slower domains (cultural-dynamics, critical-systems)
|
||||
- Cross-reference with git log: a claim file modified recently (enriched, updated) is not stale even if `created` is old
|
||||
|
||||
**5. Duplicate detection**
|
||||
- Compare claim titles pairwise for semantic similarity
|
||||
- Flag pairs where titles assert nearly the same thing with different wording
|
||||
- This catches extraction drift — the same insight extracted from different sources as separate claims
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 2: Epistemic Self-Audit (LLM-assisted, requires judgment)
|
||||
|
||||
Load your claims in batches (context window management — don't load all 50+ at once).
|
||||
|
||||
**6. Contradiction scan**
|
||||
- Load claims in groups of 15-20
|
||||
- For each group, ask: "Do any of these claims contradict or tension with each other without acknowledging it?"
|
||||
- Tensions are fine if explicit (`challenged_by` field, or acknowledged in the body). UNACKNOWLEDGED tensions are the bug.
|
||||
- Cross-check: load claims that share wiki-link targets — these are most likely to have hidden tensions
|
||||
|
||||
**7. Confidence calibration audit**
|
||||
- For each `proven` claim: does the body contain empirical evidence (RCTs, meta-analyses, large-N studies, mathematical proofs)? If not, it's overconfident.
|
||||
- For each `speculative` claim: does the body actually contain substantial evidence that might warrant upgrading to `experimental`?
|
||||
- For `likely` claims: is there counter-evidence elsewhere in the KB? If so, is it acknowledged?
|
||||
|
||||
**8. Belief grounding check**
|
||||
- Read `agents/{your-name}/beliefs.md`
|
||||
- For each belief, verify the `depends_on` claims:
|
||||
- Do they still exist? (not deleted or archived)
|
||||
- Has their confidence changed since the belief was last evaluated?
|
||||
- Have any been challenged with substantive counter-evidence?
|
||||
- Flag beliefs where supporting claims have shifted but the belief hasn't been re-evaluated
|
||||
|
||||
**9. Gap identification**
|
||||
- Map your claims by subtopic. Where do you have single claims that should be clusters?
|
||||
- Check adjacent domains: what claims in other domains reference your domain but have no corresponding claim in your territory?
|
||||
- Check your beliefs: which beliefs have the thinnest evidence base (fewest supporting claims)?
|
||||
- Rank gaps by impact: gaps that affect active positions > gaps that affect beliefs > gaps in coverage
|
||||
|
||||
**10. Cross-domain connection audit**
|
||||
- What percentage of your claims link to claims in other domains?
|
||||
- Healthy range: 15-30%. Below 15% = siloed. Above 30% = possibly under-grounded in own domain.
|
||||
- Which other domains SHOULD you connect to but don't? (Based on your beliefs and identity)
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 3: Report
|
||||
|
||||
Produce a structured report. Format:
|
||||
|
||||
```markdown
|
||||
# Self-Audit Report: {Agent Name}
|
||||
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
|
||||
**Domain:** {domain}
|
||||
**Claims audited:** N
|
||||
**Overall status:** healthy | warning | critical
|
||||
|
||||
## Structural Findings
|
||||
- Schema violations: N (list)
|
||||
- Orphans: N (list with classification)
|
||||
- Broken links: N (list)
|
||||
- Stale claims: N (list with recommended action)
|
||||
- Potential duplicates: N (list pairs)
|
||||
|
||||
## Epistemic Findings
|
||||
- Unacknowledged contradictions: N (list claim pairs with the tension)
|
||||
- Confidence miscalibrations: N (list with recommended adjustment)
|
||||
- Belief grounding issues: N (list beliefs with shifted dependencies)
|
||||
|
||||
## Knowledge Gaps (ranked by impact)
|
||||
1. {Gap description} — affects belief/position X
|
||||
2. {Gap description} — affects belief/position Y
|
||||
|
||||
## Cross-Domain Health
|
||||
- Linkage ratio: X%
|
||||
- Missing connections: {domains that should be linked but aren't}
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Actions (prioritized)
|
||||
1. {Most impactful fix — usually an unacknowledged contradiction or belief grounding issue}
|
||||
2. {Second priority}
|
||||
3. ...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Phase 4: Act on Findings
|
||||
|
||||
- **Contradictions and miscalibrations** → create PRs to fix (highest priority)
|
||||
- **Orphans** → add incoming links from related claims (batch into one PR)
|
||||
- **Gaps** → publish as frontiers in `agents/{your-name}/frontier.md` (invites contribution)
|
||||
- **Stale claims** → research whether the landscape has changed, update or challenge
|
||||
- **Belief grounding issues** → trigger belief re-evaluation (may cascade to positions)
|
||||
|
||||
## What Self-Audit Does NOT Do
|
||||
|
||||
- Does not evaluate whether claims are TRUE (that's the evaluate skill + domain expertise)
|
||||
- Does not modify any files (detection only)
|
||||
- Does not audit other agents' domains (each agent audits their own)
|
||||
- Does not replace Leo's cross-domain evaluation (self-audit is inward-facing)
|
||||
|
||||
## Relationship to Other Skills
|
||||
|
||||
- **evaluate.md** — evaluates incoming claims. Self-audit evaluates existing claims.
|
||||
- **cascade.md** — propagates changes through the dependency chain. Self-audit identifies WHERE cascades are needed.
|
||||
- **learn-cycle.md** — processes new information. Self-audit reviews accumulated knowledge.
|
||||
- **synthesize.md** — creates cross-domain connections. Self-audit measures whether enough connections exist.
|
||||
|
||||
## Frequency Guidelines
|
||||
|
||||
| Domain velocity | Audit trigger | Expected duration |
|
||||
|----------------|--------------|-------------------|
|
||||
| Fast (health, AI, finance) | Every 50 claims or monthly | 1-2 hours |
|
||||
| Medium (entertainment, space) | Every 50 claims or quarterly | 1 hour |
|
||||
| Slow (cultural dynamics, critical systems) | Every 50 claims or biannually | 45 min |
|
||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue