What is a principle, what is evidence?

Core Claims: What Supports Them?

The confidence column states the warranted epistemic status, not a calibrated probability or an unsupported high/medium/low rating.

PULSE claim	Basis	Evidence type	Warranted confidence
Recognized personhood is equal and non-scalar across substrates.	Normative doctrine and constitutional principle.	Normative principle	Normative; not an empirical confidence estimate.
Functional Integration may improve complementarity, reciprocal competence and cohesion.	Human contact literature plus internal network, ablation and scenario models.	Empirical analogue · PULSE simulation · Project assumption	Analogue-supported hypothesis; synthetic transfer and effect size unvalidated.
Materially independent failure domains reduce correlated restoration failure.	Infrastructure-dependency guidance and stylized common-mode/site-failure models.	Engineering guidance · PULSE simulation	Direction supported by dependency analysis; architecture-specific reliability unvalidated.
The 55% overall / 40% within-delegation tier balances ordinary governability with protected concurrence.	Comparative power-sharing rationale plus targeted threshold sweeps.	Constitutional precedent · Governance scholarship · PULSE simulation · Project assumption	Model-conditional design judgment; no calibrated real-world effectiveness claim.
Synthetic consciousness is a contingency, not a project prediction.	Conditional constitutional planning under consciousness uncertainty.	AI consciousness research · Project assumption	No probability of emergence established.
Epistemically diverse panel architecture may reduce classification error.	Sensitivity models of evaluator error and correlated judgment.	PULSE simulation · Project assumption	Uncalibrated diagnostic performance; correlation-sensitive.
One authorized active continuity prevents multiplication of a civic credential.	Constitutional civic convention; philosophical identity literature supplies distinctions.	Normative principle · Philosophy · Project assumption	Conceptually specified; implementation and metaphysical interpretation unresolved.
A global aggregate illicit-origin ceiling closes per-cohort cap evasion.	Anti-evasion reasoning and targeted illicit-origin integration models.	PULSE simulation · Project assumption	Structural rationale; provenance identification and implementation unvalidated.
The reproduced v2 baseline yields 114/120 first-place and 6/120 fourth-place scenario/value rankings.	Verified v2 scenario × value-system ranking from project outputs.	PULSE simulation	Internally computationally verified; externally unvalidated.
Model assumptions and sensitivity The ranking is conditional on assigned institutional effects, not independent validation. The skeptic sweep moves selected PULSE institutional-effect coefficients toward neutral 0.5 via a′ = 0.5 + m(a − 0.5), with the comparator fixed. Its aggregate lead crosses between m = 0.85 and m = 0.80. The 15–20% shorthand concerns those selected departures from neutral, not all PULSE assumptions, an empirical confidence interval, a measured safety margin or a measured advantage. Inspect assumptions and skeptic sweep →
Durability plus persistent returns may amplify private concentration and sovereignty risks.	Empirical human return heterogeneity plus internal agent and concentration models.	Empirical analogue · PULSE simulation	Mechanism-motivating analogue; synthetic extrapolation uncalibrated.
Cataclysmic Trusteeship prohibits an extinction dividend and requires staged institutional return.	Normative non-domination plus institutional continuity reasoning and readiness sensitivity models.	Normative principle · PULSE simulation	Normative objective specified; readiness and restoration implementation deferred.

Recognized personhood is equal and non-scalar across substrates. — How do we know this?

Recognition criteria are empirically contestable; the equality principle requires normative justification.

Article ii §2

[chesterman-2020]

Functional Integration may improve complementarity, reciprocal competence and cohesion. — How do we know this?

Bundled integration coefficients are not independently calibrated and do not validate the v1.2.1 non-coercion boundary.

[contact-2006]

Inspect model archive
Expert_Spread/functional_integration_network_summary_clean.csv

Inspect model archive
data/pulse_doctrine_ablation_v2.csv

Materially independent failure domains reduce correlated restoration failure. — How do we know this?

Common-mode assumptions govern model gains; redundancy does not establish species-restoration feasibility.

Inspect model archive
Prior_Simulation_Archive/All_Models_and_Simulations/04_Targeted_v0.9.3/restoration_failure_domain_sensitivity_v093.csv

The 55% overall / 40% within-delegation tier balances ordinary governability with protected concurrence. — How do we know this?

Support distributions and normative loss weights determine trade-offs; protected 83/67 thresholds must not be conflated with the ordinary tier.

Article x §3

Inspect model archive
Prior_Simulation_Archive/All_Models_and_Simulations/03_Targeted_v0.9.2/senate_threshold_grid_v092.csv

Synthetic consciousness is a contingency, not a project prediction. — How do we know this?

Consciousness indicators and precautionary welfare arguments are not verified present-system personhood or inevitability claims.

Article xviii §1

Epistemically diverse panel architecture may reduce classification error. — How do we know this?

Panel multiplicity is not epistemic independence; real sensitivities, specificities and ground truth remain unknown.

Article xvii §4

[butlin-2023]

Inspect model archive
Expert_Spread/personhood_correlated_error_sensitivity.csv

One authorized active continuity prevents multiplication of a civic credential. — How do we know this?

Non-fungibility and preservation of conscious loci constrain enforcement; the rule is not a solution to personal-identity metaphysics.

[identity-2023]

A global aggregate illicit-origin ceiling closes per-cohort cap evasion. — How do we know this?

The 30% threshold is not empirically calibrated; Schedule B defers spacing, lineage aggregation, appeals and operating buffers.

Inspect model archive
Prior_Simulation_Archive/All_Models_and_Simulations/03_Targeted_v0.9.2/rogue_cap_sensitivity_v092.csv

Baseline ranking: inspect assumptions and sensitivity

The reproduced v2 baseline yields 114/120 first-place and 6/120 fourth-place scenario/value rankings. — How do we know this?

All losses occur in scenario 19; parameterization and normative aggregation determine rankings, and trajectories are not independent empirical civilizations.

Inspect model archive
verified-baseline-ranks.csv

Inspect model archive
data/main_scenario_architecture_results_v2.csv

Inspect model archive
data/value_system_weights.csv

Durability plus persistent returns may amplify private concentration and sovereignty risks. — How do we know this?

Future return processes, institutions and access regimes are unknown; no adopted economic architecture follows uniquely.

[fagereng-2020]

Inspect model archive
Expert_Spread/economics_persistent_return_longevity_agent_model.csv

Inspect model archive
data/private_concentration_sweep.csv

Cataclysmic Trusteeship prohibits an extinction dividend and requires staged institutional return. — How do we know this?

Species restoration differs from individual resurrection; modeled civic-capacity indices do not supply adopted demographic exit percentages.

Inspect model archive
Prior_Simulation_Archive/All_Models_and_Simulations/05_Eternum_v1.1_Trusteeship_Return/trusteeship_return_sensitivity_v11.csv