{
  "canonicalUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/research/operational-evidence-qualification/",
  "correctionStatus": "CURRENT K05 RELEASE",
  "findings": [
    "The report treats 1\\. Metadata and Research-Status Front Matter as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The report treats 2\\. Executive Decision Brief as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The report treats 3\\. Formal Definitions as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The report treats 4\\. Evidence-Property Taxonomy as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The report treats 5\\. Evidence-Chain Entity Model as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The report treats 6\\. Record Invariants as a distinct analytical area that must be evaluated separately from adjacent legal, technical, operational, or institutional claims.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-OEA (Source-Authorization Profile): Defines the root identity, public keys, and authorized scope of a source. This maps conceptually to a trust anchor or X.509 certificate profile, delineating who is permitted to speak within a specific domain.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-OED (Source-Authorization Decision): The point-in-time binding of an identity to an allowed claim space. It converts the static profile (PAT-OEA) into an active, revocable authorization state.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-OAI (Point-in-Time Source Integrity Inspection): Cryptographic verification (e.g., signature verification, schema validation) of submitted evidence. This maps to the concept of in-toto \"inspections\" or SCITT signed statements9.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-OAR (Review, Contest, Correction, Reinspection, and Closure Evidence): Human or algorithmic appraisal of the evidence. This entity leverages Subjective Logic opinion spaces (Belief, Disbelief, Uncertainty, Base Rate)13. It is crucial to note that contest is not automatic invalidation.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-ORP (Exact-Purpose Reliance Policy): The parameterized requirements (maximum age, required sources, necessary reviews) for a specific action. This acts as the policy engine configuration.",
    "The source report identifies this proposition for governed review: PAT-ORD (Point-in-Time Reliance Decision): The deterministic output of evaluating an inspection graph against a PAT-ORP. It states that at time ![][image1], the graph met policy ![][image2]."
  ],
  "headings": [
    "Operational Evidence Qualification and Suitability: A Formal Architecture for Source Authorization, Inspection, Review, Reliance, Use, Currentness, and Decision Support",
    "1\\. Metadata and Research-Status Front Matter",
    "2\\. Executive Decision Brief",
    "3\\. Formal Definitions",
    "4\\. Evidence-Property Taxonomy",
    "5\\. Evidence-Chain Entity Model",
    "6\\. Record Invariants",
    "7\\. State and Transition Model",
    "8\\. Currentness and Aging Model",
    "9\\. Contradiction and Dispute Model",
    "10\\. Purpose-Bound Qualification Model",
    "11\\. Point-in-Time Suitability Decision Model",
    "12\\. Use Receipt and Reproducibility Model",
    "13\\. Fresh Evidence and Fresh-Use Linkage",
    "14\\. Privacy-Minimized Export Model",
    "15\\. Threat Model",
    "16\\. Cross-Domain Comparative Analysis",
    "17\\. Recommended PAT-OEA through PAT-ORS Semantics",
    "18\\. Recommended Field-Level Schemas",
    "19\\. Validation and Test Strategy",
    "20\\. Failure and Rollback Requirements",
    "21\\. Human-Readable and Machine-Readable Presentation",
    "22\\. Open Questions",
    "23\\. Bibliography",
    "24\\. Claim-to-Source Traceability Appendix",
    "25\\. Patefacere and .uai Integration Appendix",
    "Recommended Integrations",
    "Works cited"
  ],
  "id": "REP-K01-005",
  "lastReviewed": "2026-08-16",
  "machineRecordUrl": "https://xn--mwe.com/data/reports/operational-evidence-qualification.json",
  "originalFilename": "Evidence Architecture Research Plan(1).md",
  "qualification": "The raw report remains a governed research input and does not become current law, verified implementation, operational authority, or project doctrine merely through inclusion.",
  "rawSourcePublic": false,
  "releaseId": "K12-2026-08-16",
  "researchCutoff": "2026-08-16",
  "slug": "operational-evidence-qualification",
  "source": "evidence-architecture-research-plan-1.md",
  "sourceRevalidatedAt": "2026-08-15T23:00:00Z",
  "sourceSha256": "3921560c86a819f02f86dd4b7c8ac29dd45491a03d3c12d307d6eb9f6b2ae0de",
  "sourceSizeBytes": 83110,
  "sourceStatus": "reference-source; review and correct before active use",
  "sourceTitle": "Operational Evidence Qualification and Suitability: A Formal Architecture for Source Authorization, Inspection, Review, Reliance, Use, Currentness, and Decision Support",
  "status": "PROJECT TECHNICAL PROPOSAL",
  "summary": "A plan for qualifying operational evidence by source, authenticity, integrity, relevance, reliability, completeness, currentness and suitability rather than using a single verified label.",
  "title": "Operational Evidence Qualification and Suitability: A Formal Architecture for Source Authorization, Inspection, Review, Reliance, Use, Currentness, and Decision Support",
  "topic": "evidence-provenance",
  "type": "ReportSynthesis"
}