Map of Content

Map of Content

Comprehensive index of the flexo-rtm-research wiki. Every page is listed once with a one-line annotation. The sidebar is for navigation; this page is for orientation. Sections mirror the sidebar's grouping.

0. Foundation

• Home — landing page; what this wiki is, audience, status, navigation.
• Mission and Thesis — the eight propositions; what flexo-rtm is and isn't.
• Verifiable Self-Certification — the core concept; structural completeness and locality.
• Design Spec — canonical normative source; every other page explains a passage from here.

1. Internal Research (synthesis of prior work)

• Flexo Git Coexistence — flexo-conflict-resolution-policy-research findings applied to RTM storage.
• ADCS Prototype Lessons — what ADCS-lifecycle-demo proves; what carries forward vs. what we abstract.
• MVC Pattern from RIME TRL ANT — the operator-facing pattern lifted from existing examples as UX baseline.
• Human-AI Accountability — Zargham 2026 framing applied to RTM; traceability as accountability surface.

2. External Research (literature)

• OSLC RM and QM Review — OSLC RM/QM vocabulary review; the data model flexo-rtm adopts and the deployment-model assumptions it adjusts; lineage from IBM/Doors origins.
• INCOSE V2 Review — alignment with INCOSE's V2 concept hierarchy.
• OMG SysMLv2 — canonical model vocabulary anchoring requirement and verification concepts.
• PROV EARL GSN P-PLAN — the four adopted W3C/community vocabularies and the parsimony budget over them.

3. v0.1 Certification Model (what ships now)

• Traditional Forward and Backward Analysis — primary user surface; Doors/Jama-familiar coverage analysis.
• Attestation Infrastructure in v0.1 — three attestation subclasses (Approval, VerificationVerdict, Justification) with named-approver SHACL.
• Identity Boundaries and Policy Projections — thin RDF projections of external identities; RBAC, ABAC, scope-bounded authorization.
• External URI References — git+commit, content-addressed identifiers, and OCI; the open-source-first foundation.
• Signed Envelopes and Established Standards — W3C VC-DI, DSSE, Sigstore, cosign, and signed git commits as the crypto substrate.
• Aspect Coverage with Adequacy and Sufficiency — per-aspect, per-claim-type coverage matrix that drives the v0.1 outcome.
• Federated Audit and Composition — scope-level adequacy and sufficiency layered on self-certification; new attestation subjects for reproducibility audits, qualified-role audits, and composition certification.
• Certification Predicate — v0.1 basic predicate (thresholded coverage); brief note on the future-framework predicate.
• Gap Taxonomy — T1–T8 ship in v0.1; G3–G9 documented as future-framework gap classes.
• Quantitative Outcomes — v0.1 metrics, configurable thresholds, and how the binary view is derived.

4. Roadmap and future work

Two distinct timelines apply here. Engineering lifecycle stages are a v0.2 roadmap item — vocabulary is settled and ships in v0.1 for forward-compat; the full state-machine mechanism (gate relaxation, lifecycle-aware regression) lands in v0.2. The topological framework, by contrast, remains in research phase — its timeline depends on community-curated registry governance and open invariant research.

• Engineering Lifecycle Stages — rtm:lifecycleStage and INCOSE-aligned stage IRIs; vocabulary v0.1, full mechanism v0.2.
• Topological Framework Future Work — deferred (research-phase) vision, recursion structure, registry concept, open questions.
• Vertices Edges Faces — future-framework type catalog (V, E, F) that generalizes traditional traceability.

5. Three-Layer Architecture

• Three-Layer Architecture — operational / storage / analysis layers and the contracts between them.
• Operational Layer UX Discipline — why authoring latency is a first-class constraint.
• Storage Layer Flexo Conventions — named-graph layout and transactional semantics.
• Analysis Layer Scope Algebra — rtm:Scope as a first-class RDF resource; algebra of scope composition.

6. Ontology Design

• Layered Ontology — Core / Alignment / Profiles / Shapes / Imports / Parsimony layering.
• Parsimony Policy — MIREOT/SLME extraction; ~2k-triple target for the assembled rtm.ttl.
• Alignment Strategy — owl:equivalentClass and skos:closeMatch only; no novel terms in alignment.
• Profile Mechanism — composable SHACL contracts, orthogonal to scope.
• GSN Integration — Solution + Justification pattern for adequacy and sufficiency claims.

7. Adapter Contracts

• Lossless Roundtrip Definition — Layer A (RDFC-1.0 canonical equivalence) + Layer C (vendor carry-through).
• Vendor Extension Carry-Through — source-preserving per-resource named graphs that survive a round trip.
• OSLC RM Adapter Contract — full RM mapping table, SHACL profile, fixtures.
• OSLC QM Adapter Contract — QM test-artifact mapping, verdict vocabulary, the QM-RM bridge.

8. Reproducibility

• RDFC-1.0 Canonicalization — W3C dataset canonicalization; the equivalence backbone for flexo-rtm.
• Transcript Replay Semantics — TranscriptStep schema, replay algorithm, tampering detection.
• Approver Binding via Git — pre-commit hook + GitHub Actions verifying committer matches rtm:approvedBy.

9. Decision Log

The Decision Log holds 30 ADRs (ADR-001 through ADR-029, plus ADR-003a) plus an ADR Template. Each ADR documents one of the locked decisions from Design Spec §14 in the standard context/decision/consequences format. The full list is in the sidebar under Decision Log. ADR-028 (scope-level adequacy and sufficiency for federated audit) closes research issue #3; ADR-029 (engineering lifecycle stages as scope metadata) closes research issue #6.

10. Meta

• INCOSE IS 2026 Paper — pointer/stub for Zargham 2026; motivates the accountability framing used throughout.

Reading paths

• "I want to understand the thesis." Mission and Thesis → Verifiable Self-Certification → Traditional Forward and Backward Analysis → Topological Framework Future Work.
• "I want to evaluate the design decisions." Design Spec (especially §9.A and §14), then scan ADR-001 through ADR-025 in sequence from the sidebar.
• "I want to understand a specific boundary." Pick from the v0.1 Certification Model section above; each page cross-links to the relevant [[Design Spec]] §9.A acceptance criteria.