{
  "$schema": "eden-references-relation-register-v1",
  "proposed_home": "research/data/references-relation-register.json (T4 places at landing)",
  "purpose": "The typed chronological relation register over the programme's references: every outside work the estate engages, typed by its relation to the programme, feeding the related-work page and the research graph as typed edges. Types: foundational | antecedent | adjacent | rival | convergent | correction-trigger.",
  "discipline": "Two rules govern every row. (1) The anchor rule, inherited from the antecedents register: a work dated before 8 December 2024 is an antecedent, conceded in full, never argued against as though novel; a work on or after the anchor is convergence, evidencing that the field arrived where the record already was, never claimed as caused, predicted or influenced. (2) The reading rule: a row carries a type only when the relation rests on a recorded read-at-source adjudication or a pointer to a register row that carries one; a row without that basis sits in the pending queue and renders on the related-work page as 'listed, relation pending reading', never with a guessed type. Pointer rows never duplicate the pointed-to register's content. (3) The result rule, added 3 September 2026: the anchor rule types a work against the programme's founding record, and a work may postdate that anchor while preceding the particular programme result it bears on. Such a row is typed 'precedes-result', names the programme artefact and its date, and concedes priority for the specific claim. Typing such a work as convergence would assert the field arrived where the record already was, which is false whenever the outside work came first on that claim.",
  "typed_rows": [
    {
      "id": "REF-001..009",
      "kind": "pointer-block",
      "points_to": "antecedents-register.json entries AN-001 to AN-009",
      "type": "antecedent",
      "note": "The nine adjudicated antecedent rows (Yampolskiy 2020, Good 1965, Bostrom 2014, Vinge 1993, West-Brown-Enquist 1997, White-Seymour 2003, Kozlowski-Konarzewski 2004, Bettencourt et al. 2007, Hutter 2012) are carried by pointer with their read statuses, verbatim-where-read quotes, do-not-quote-until-read rules and positioning verbs intact. Overlays for the graph: AN-005 (WBE 1997) additionally emits a foundational-premise edge per its own positioning verb ('cite as premise, never re-derive'); AN-006 and AN-007 emit rival edges pointing at AN-005, never at the programme, per their own rows ('a rival to WBE 1997's value, not to the mechanism this programme inherits'). The register's open checks OC-001 (Yampolskiy 2024 book date) and OC-002 (the systematic pre-anchor search) are carried by pointer unmodified.",
      "basis": "antecedents-register.json (read statuses and adjudications recorded in that register; verified 27 August 2026)"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-010",
      "work": "The Cauchy functional equation tradition (Cauchy 1821 onward)",
      "type": "foundational",
      "relation": "The mathematical spine the corpus builds on: the unification of the scaling families under the Cauchy functional equations, stated in the papers' own sections.",
      "basis": "the cauchy-unification concept (concepts-registry.json) and the papers' own reference sections (paper-vii, on-the-origin); read-first adjudication recorded in those sections' authoring"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-011",
      "work": "Aczel, J. (1966). Lectures on Functional Equations and Their Applications",
      "type": "antecedent",
      "relation": "The standard treatment of the functional-equation families the corpus inherits; conceded as the reference work, with the programme's contribution being the application, never the mathematics.",
      "basis": "paper-vii-cauchy-unification's own antecedent list, which carries the Aczel (1966) entry as the standard reference for all four Cauchy equations"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-012",
      "work": "Hyers, D. H. (1941). On the stability of the linear functional equation (and the Hyers-Ulam tradition)",
      "type": "antecedent",
      "relation": "Stability of functional equations under perturbation; the corpus' stability vocabulary is positioned against this tradition per the recorded reading adjudication.",
      "basis": "on-the-origin-of-scaling-laws, which carries the full Hyers-Ulam stability treatment (Assumption 3) with its per-equation adjudication and reference 19"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-013",
      "work": "The Willow team's quantum error correction preprint (public 24 August 2024)",
      "type": "antecedent",
      "relation": "Under the anchor rule this is strictly an antecedent: the team's preprint (24 August 2024) predates the manuscript record (8 December 2024), and the estate concedes exactly that on every surface. The published grading vocabulary is 'convergent timing, never prediction', which encodes the same concession: both dates always travel together, and no prediction is claimed. The two vocabularies agree in substance and this row records both.",
      "basis": "Paper II's convergent-timing clause; prediction-outcomes.json row PO-08 (both verified)"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-014",
      "work": "The wisdom-tradition convergence set (the recursive-creation gradings)",
      "type": "antecedent",
      "relation": "Convergent structure across traditions, graded row by row in the gradings register and rendered on the recursive-creation page under the standing rule: convergence is evidence of naturalness, never of truth. Carried by pointer; this register never re-grades them.",
      "basis": "creation-theory-gradings.json and the recursive-creation page (pointer; grading discipline lives there)",
      "note": " Typed antecedent per the anchor rule and per the gradings register's own section labels (antecedent intuitions; prior work); the convergent STRUCTURE those rows grade is a description of content, never a priority claim, and the grading discipline (convergence is evidence of naturalness, never of truth) lives in the gradings register."
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-015",
      "work": "The August 2026 cold readers (external AI assessments)",
      "type": "correction-trigger",
      "relation": "External reads whose findings entered the record and changed it: the decisive-experiment map gap was identified by a cold read and fixed the same day, with the assessment recorded verbatim in the reception register. Correction-trigger edges point from the assessment row to the artefact it changed.",
      "basis": "cold-read-assessments.json row COLD-2026-08-26-03 (on the merging outcomes branch; verified)"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-016",
      "work": "The two outside rederivations of the correlated-corrections objection (FALS-023)",
      "type": "correction-trigger",
      "note": "Two external reads independently rederived the programme's own named weak joint without access to the register: an external red-team read on 15 August 2026 (both directions) and an unsigned zero-history complete read on 26 August 2026 (the ten-pilots-are-not-ten-confirmations form). The objection was the programme's own first (published beside FALS-023 before either read); the rederivations are recorded beside the condition they anticipate. Typed the day its unlock condition fired: the clause landed in the falsification record on 27 August 2026 and both sources hold citable register rows.",
      "basis": "inbound-engagement.json rows DE-002 and DE-003 (dated, verification URLs to /review/ and the falsification dashboard); falsification.json FALS-023 statusText, closing sentence (the two-rederivation clause)"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-020",
      "work": "Sharma and Chopra, The Sequential Edge, arXiv:2511.02309",
      "date": "2025-11-04",
      "type": "precedes-result",
      "precedes": "Paper II's public empirical formulation, 22 January 2026, by about eleven weeks",
      "note": "Sequential chains that build on previous attempts beat parallel self-consistency at equal token budget. Priority for the broad matched-compute result is theirs and is conceded on every surface. What the programme retains is narrower: estimating separate exponents for sequential depth and parallel breadth rather than reporting a win rate, which their paper does not do. U = I x R^alpha is a proposed schematic and expository relation. It is not a validated quantitative law and is not a load-bearing mechanism; both required qualifiers stand together at the claims ledger (/research/claims/).",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; the concession is rendered on the related-work page and in research/priority.json"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-021",
      "work": "Engels, Baek, Kantamneni and Tegmark, Scaling Laws for Scalable Oversight, arXiv:2504.18530",
      "date": "2025-04-01",
      "type": "precedes-result",
      "precedes": "the programme's registered proposition that external alignment does not scale with capability",
      "note": "Models oversight as a game between capability-mismatched players, fits oversight performance across four games and derives optimal nesting depth. Scalable oversight was already a quantitative scaling problem, so no claim of first quantification is available to this programme, and the registered proposition now stands explicitly against the weight of published evidence rather than beside it.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; rendered on the related-work page"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-022",
      "work": "Gu and colleagues, arXiv:2604.05868",
      "date": "2026-04-01",
      "type": "adverse",
      "note": "Reports the opposite direction to the programme's own result: parallel sampling outperforming sequential across Qwen3, DeepSeek-R1 distilled models and Gemini 2.5, on mathematics and coding, attributed to reduced exploration when a chain conditions on its own previous answers. Carried because a result adverse to the programme's first proposition belongs on the same page as the result it contests.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; rendered on the related-work page"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-023",
      "work": "Prairie, Novack, Berg-Kirkpatrick and Fu, Parcae, arXiv:2604.12946",
      "date": "2026-04-14",
      "type": "rival-form",
      "note": "Reports test-time looping scaling as a predictable saturating exponential decay. This is the empirical basis of the saturating rival in the registered form comparison, which is why a straight line on logarithmic axes over a short ladder cannot settle the functional form.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; named in the registration's alternative baselines"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-024",
      "work": "Alabdulmohsin and Zhai, Recursive Inference Scaling, arXiv:2502.07503",
      "date": "2025-02-11",
      "type": "precedes-result",
      "precedes": "the programme's claim that recursive depth admits a quantitative scaling law",
      "note": "Calls its method a particular form of recursive depth, compares in a compute-matched regime and derives scaling laws. It reaches a quantity, which is why the site's wider claim that every antecedent stops before one was narrowed on 3 September 2026.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; rendered on the related-work page"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-025",
      "work": "Schwethelm, Rueckert and Kaissis, How Much Is One Recurrence Worth?, arXiv:2604.21106",
      "date": "2026-04-22",
      "type": "nearest-neighbour",
      "note": "The closest mathematical neighbour located: a fitted exponent on recurrence itself. It reaches an exponent, so it bears directly on what the programme's first proposition may claim as distinctive.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; rendered on the related-work page"
    },
    {
      "id": "REF-026",
      "work": "Wu and colleagues, Is Depth All You Need?, arXiv:2502.10858",
      "date": "2025-02-01",
      "type": "precedes-result",
      "precedes": "the programme's depth-against-breadth comparison",
      "note": "Frames iterative depth against breadth reasoning before the programme's own comparison. Priority for the broad depth-versus-breadth framing is conceded.",
      "basis": "read at source and dated 3 September 2026; rendered on the related-work page"
    }
  ],
  "pending_queue": [
    {
      "id": "PEND-001",
      "work": "Good 1965, Bostrom 2014 (chapters 8 to 13), Vinge 1993",
      "why_pending": "The antecedents register's own rows carry read:false and do-not-quote-until-read rules; typed already as antecedent by that register, but quotation and characterisation stay locked until the reads happen.",
      "unlocks": "read at source, pages recorded, then the pointer rows gain quotation rights"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-002",
      "work": "Yampolskiy (2024). AI: Unexplainable, Unpredictable, Uncontrollable",
      "why_pending": "Open check OC-001: publication date relative to 2024-12-08 decides antecedent versus convergent. Until answered, only the 2020 paper is cited.",
      "unlocks": "one date check at source"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-003",
      "work": "TAR (2024), the removal-resistance work",
      "why_pending": "An internal adjudication exists but no public register row does; typing and any characterisation wait for that row.",
      "unlocks": "primary read recorded plus a durable register row"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-004",
      "work": "Hernandez et al. (the agent-diversity paper)",
      "why_pending": "No public register row exists for this work; a clearance row is the unlock, and characterisation waits for it.",
      "unlocks": "an assertion-quarantine or register row recording the clearance"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-006",
      "work": "Veenstra et al., arXiv:2508.20052 (wave coarsening) and arXiv:2607.28781",
      "why_pending": "Two 2025-2026 preprints surfaced by a literature sweep whose anchoring record is not yet public; rows type when it is.",
      "unlocks": "study-t submission (the author's submission click)"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-007",
      "work": "The simulation-hypothesis literature and its 2025 critiques",
      "why_pending": "The estate's position relative to the 2025 critiques of the simulation-hypothesis literature types only after those works are read at source.",
      "unlocks": "surface citation recorded"
    },
    {
      "id": "PEND-008",
      "work": "The Law III depth-treatment critic",
      "why_pending": "The depth criticism is being carried as a printed limitation across the Law III surfaces; the correction-trigger row types when the propagation completes and a stable public anchor exists.",
      "unlocks": "the limitation live at a stable URL"
    }
  ],
  "erg_edge_contract": {
    "edge": "{source_work, target (programme claim, law, paper or register row), type, basis_register, basis_row}",
    "render_rule": "The related-work page renders typed rows with their type and basis; pending rows render as 'listed, relation pending reading' with no type shown. Types are never hand-assigned at render time; the page generates from this register (fossil law).",
    "graph_rule": "Rival edges may connect third parties to each other (AN-006/007 to AN-005) without touching the programme; absence of programme-rival edges is itself recorded state, per OC-002, never silently implied."
  },
  "provenance": "Public copy of the typed references relation register; coordination vocabulary reworded to public forms at the copy boundary, 27 Aug 2026. Seven works verified at source on 3 September 2026 typed in the same pass that corrected the priority ledger; the result rule was added because the anchor rule alone typed the earliest of them as convergence."
}