Foundational Concepts
A shared vocabulary for observation, evidence, and determination
IBC Labs research uses several recurring concepts to distinguish what is present in an interaction from what may only be inferred about it.
The explanations below are plain-language introductions. Formal definitions, qualifications, and governing boundaries remain in the corresponding research papers.
| Concept | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Interaction Boundary | The interaction boundary is the point at which an interaction is encountered and must be interpreted for action.A user may receive an answer. An operator may observe a decision. An agent may act on a recommendation. An evaluator may inspect a recorded outcome.What is available at that point determines what the interaction itself can support. Information reconstructed elsewhere may expand the evidence available to a later investigation, but it was not thereby present at the original boundary. |
| Observable Interaction Surface | The observable interaction surface is the information available to a participant or evaluator at or through the interaction boundary.It may include an input, output, action, rationale, timestamp, identifier, or exposed system metadata. A surface can be rich while still remaining incomplete with respect to the composition that produced the interaction. |
| Producing Composition | Producing composition refers to the components and processes that materially participate in producing an interaction.Depending on the system, this may include models, retrieval systems, orchestration logic, tools, rules, data sources, routes, transformations, dependency versions, feature pipelines, or external services.Producing composition is not identical to the visible output, the product name, the endpoint, or the system label presented to a user. |
| Presence and Reconstruction | Presence concerns what is available at the interaction boundary when the interaction is encountered.Reconstruction concerns what can later be assembled through logs, traces, telemetry, inspection, documentation, or investigation.Reconstruction can provide valuable evidence and may support broader inferences. It is not the same condition as compositional information being present and bound to the interaction at the point of encounter. |
| Observation | An observation records what was available from a declared perspective under declared conditions.Observation is always situated. It depends on the interface, instrumentation, timing, access, and conditions through which it was collected.A valid observation does not have to be complete. It does need to be represented honestly as an observation rather than silently expanded into a conclusion. |
| Evaluation | Evaluation applies a declared property, rule, criterion, or relation to an observation set.Evaluation creates the structured basis from which a determination may be made. It does not automatically decide correctness, cause, significance, or suitability unless those judgments are separately defined and supported. |
| Determination | A determination is a bounded conclusion supported by the available evidence and the declared evaluation construction.A defensible determination states: • What was established • Which evidence supports it • Which interaction or observation set it concerns• Under what conditions it applies • What it does not establish • What remains unresolved |
| Identity and Identity Basis | Identity is an explicit signal that distinguishes an entity or component from others.An identity basis is the underlying reference to which continuity is bound. The visible identifier may change while the identity basis remains stable, or a visible label may remain unchanged while its underlying basis does not.An explicit identity signal provides a stable referent for later claims. It does not, by itself, prove that the identified entity participated in a particular interaction. |
| Distinct Interaction Claims | The research distinguishes several claims that are frequently collapsed: • Identity: an entity or component is distinguishable. • Invocation: the identified entity or component was called. • Observable participation: available evidence supports that it participated. • Completeness: the claim accounts for the relevant participating composition within its stated boundary. • Material contribution: the identified participant contributed materially to the outcome.One claim must not be silently interpreted as establishing another. |
| Interaction-Specific Evidentiary Binding | Evidence is interaction-specific when it resolves to the same interaction as the claim it is intended to support.Generic model documentation, configuration records, artifact provenance, or system-level telemetry may provide relevant context. They do not automatically establish a claim about a particular interaction.The evidence must concern the interaction under evaluation, not merely a related system, model, artifact, or time period. |
| Claim Boundaries | Claim boundaries define the reach of an assertion and the conditions under which it applies.They prevent a partial claim from being interpreted as complete, a claim about one component from being extended to an entire system, or evidence from one interaction from being applied to another without justification.Claim boundaries preserve the distinction between what was asserted and what remains outside the assertion. |
| Residual Uncertainty | Residual uncertainty is what remains unresolved after the available evidence has been evaluated.It is not necessarily a defect. It may result from missing evidence, incomplete coverage, finite observations, unknown conditions, ambiguous identity, or limits imposed by the interaction boundary itself.Naming the residual prevents unresolved questions from being converted into assumed facts. |
| Conformance and Reliance | Conformance determines whether an implementation satisfies the requirements of a standard.Reliance determines whether a claim and its evidence are sufficient for a particular decision in a particular context.A claim may be conformant and false. It may be conformant but insufficient for a high-stakes decision. Different relying parties may interpret the same conformant claim differently because their decision contexts, risk tolerances, and obligations differ.Conformance establishes satisfaction of the standard. It does not establish truth or dictate reliance. |