What assertion classes and semantic distinctions belong in the universe. Upstream of LiO; not addressed by this paper.
Research Map · LiO v0.1
A claim ledger, not a flowchart
LiO v0.1's argument is structured as a formal ledger of established claims versus conditional dependencies, so the map reproduces that ledger directly.
Three separated problems
What each indispensable bridge permits, excludes, or leaves unresolved. Upstream of LiO; not addressed by this paper.
Given those supplied inputs, what authorization deterministically survives every indispensable bridge. This is what LiO v0.1 addresses.
The claim ledger
| Category | Claim | Status |
|---|---|---|
| C-CORE-001 | Cross-model reproducibility on the Cycle 1 corpus | Established by E12 Cycle 1: 7/7 public, 12/12 held-out exact |
| C-CORE-002 | Resolved and partially unresolved composition matched creator-frozen expectations | Established, no semantic disagreement observed |
| C-CORE-003 | Explicit unresolvedness preserved in tested cases | Established, within the tested corpus only |
| C-UPSTREAM-001–004 | Assertion-space adequacy; reproducible non-circular adjudication; local separability; dependency completeness | Required but not validated by this paper |
Reading the map
LiO v0.1 does not verify any of its own upstream preconditions merely by receiving them as inputs. The paper is explicit: “LiO cannot detect a missing indispensable dependency,” and a deterministic kernel “cannot compensate for an unstable upstream adjudication procedure.” What Cycle 1 validated is narrower than what the full architecture would require.
Citation
Suggested citation
Preble, Micheal Charles. “LiO v0.1: Deterministic Permission Composition Across Indispensable Inferential Bridges” Available at SSRN 7424499, 2026. CC BY 4.0.
Preble, Micheal Charles. “LiO v0.1: Deterministic Permission Composition Across Indispensable Inferential Bridges” Available at SSRN 7424499, 2026. CC BY 4.0.