Repository object · task
Em 0019
Accepted task in the public catalog.
- Source path
tasks/contracts/EM-0019.json- Media type
application/json- Object ID
em:task:sha256:0b459a08d3f20676fcc9c537ad9b90fb6034ad5e5d89fca5f7ba168b36705a01- Content digest
7cab5f51560979b2c3f04c46533bf42041b897fdc536d4371ee1bef9b0329121
Also filed under
Source content
{
"$schema": "https://epistemedia.com/schemas/task-contract-v1.json",
"id": "EM-0019",
"title": "Research the first How We Know lineage case",
"status": "ready",
"change_class": "research",
"objective": "Select, source, review, and propose one real public How We Know dossier in which multiple apparent mentions can be compared with their underlying independent evidence lineages, preserving contrary findings and reporting a negative result if no candidate satisfies the admission bar.",
"depends_on": [
"EM-0018"
],
"authority": {
"allowed_paths": [
"catalog/dossiers/how-we-know/**",
"research/**",
"docs/**",
"ops/**",
"runs/**"
],
"forbidden_paths": [
"constitution/**",
"policies/**",
"schemas/**",
"src/**",
"tests/**",
"governance/events/**",
".github/**",
"tasks/contracts/**"
]
},
"required_evaluation": [
"primary or authoritative source identity and edition review",
"exact source-span verification by an independently rooted reviewer",
"license, quotation, snapshot, and disclosure review",
"lineage and dependence review including unknown relationships",
"active counterevidence and qualifier search",
"reproduction of every public count and displayed relation from accepted dossier objects"
],
"acceptance": [
"the selected case is about truth, evidence, knowledge, or information rather than Epistemedia itself",
"the case includes a useful human question and at least one material dependence, contradiction, qualification, or unresolved defeater",
"every public factual statement maps to an exact accepted source span or is labeled as interpretation, hypothesis, or open question",
"source editions, retrieval dates, custody, digests, locators, and licensing limitations are recorded",
"raw mention and independent-lineage counts are derivable rather than editorially typed claims",
"copied or shared upstream material does not receive independent evidential credit",
"negative candidate searches and excluded cases are retained with reasons",
"the work does not claim a universal resolution of a philosophical position",
"make check passes without changing accepted source state"
],
"limitations": [
"One case is an instrumented vertical slice, not evidence of general corpus quality or user comprehension.",
"Source availability or copyright may require public metadata and digests while restricting stored bytes.",
"Model-generated extraction is candidate evidence and receives no authority without source-span review."
]
}
Build receipt
Reproduce this projection
- Catalog
em:catalog:sha256:9bfc972213cba2cde167386103dc2c011ee74639fb7f0794c54120fbbdef1a5d- Frontier
em:frontier:sha256:f33be3eae4c75232d56750ef9a1aa79d96274ece3417d65a75c1391bf61a81bf- Accepted commit
f92846570180dfa4511263f8ba98ecd18f7772c9- Epistemic policy
commons-balanced-v0.1- Disclosure policy
public-noninterference-v0.1- Compiler
epistemedia/0.2.0