Research · 28 Jul 2026

The formal specification is finished at v0.4

It goes out as it stands, with no form in front of it and no email address collected.

Version
v0.4
Pages
118
Licence
CC BY 4.0
Gate
None

Specifics

The numbers, and where they come from

Figures on this page, with the basis of each
QuantityValueBasis
Document versionv0.4Stated
Pages118Counted
Failure accounting11 rows, 2 unsoundCounted
LicenceCC BY 4.0Stated
Failure accounting40 ppStage specifications46 ppData structures21 ppFront matter and index11 pp
Where the 118 pages go. The failure accounting is the largest single section.

What changed

The specification is complete

v0.4 closes the last two open sections: the typed flag algebra used at selection, and the exact conditions under which stage eight writes a bridge into the derivation record. Both were previously described in prose and are now stated formally, which means they can be argued with.

The document is 118 pages. Roughly a third of it is the failure accounting, which is the part we expect a technical evaluator at a regulated buyer to read first, and the part most likely to be quoted back at us.

The work

What v0.4 settles

  • 01

    The flag algebra

    Every stage returns a result or a typed flag. v0.4 fixes the lattice those flags sit in and proves that flags outrank results at selection, which is the property the repair path depends on.

  • 02

    Bridge licensing

    A bridge is only written to the record when a qualia relation licenses it. The relation is named in the record. No other architecture can populate that field, and v0.4 states the exact conditions.

  • 03

    Determinism scope

    Stated as holding within a build identified by artefact hash. Not across builds. This was already our position and is now written where it can be checked.

  • 04

    What is still open

    The authorship problem is named as out of scope rather than forthcoming. It is a research problem and the specification says so.

Publication

No form, no gate

Putting the mathematics behind a lead capture form would be the single worst decision available to us. The whole commercial claim is that the mechanism can be inspected; asking for an email address before showing it refutes the claim on the way in.

The document is published under CC BY 4.0 with a changelog. Corrections to it appear in this log as their own dated entries, with the superseded text struck rather than removed.

What this is not

A specification is not a working engine. v0.4 describes a system whose demo is four to six months out. Read it as a design that can be checked, not as evidence that the design has been built.