{ "schemaVersion": "gships-review-packet-1", "packetId": "systems:ai-autonomy", "stableId": "ai-autonomy", "family": "systems", "slug": "ai-autonomy", "title": "AI, LLMs, autonomy & digital twins", "status": "prepared-human-review-not-started", "release": { "releaseId": "public-alpha-2026-07-26-research-visuals-r14", "sourceCommit": "3eb036fce3d711336c8c605625895e8a2e799ab0", "corpusGeneratedAt": "2026-07-25", "frozenAt": "2026-07-26T22:50:50.000Z", "canonicalOrigin": "https://gships.dammonburden.com" }, "paths": { "human": "/review/systems/ai-autonomy", "family": "/review/systems", "packet": "/review-packets/systems/ai-autonomy.533f9d7d5a5c0633.json", "decisionTemplate": "/review-packets/systems/ai-autonomy.533f9d7d5a5c0633.decision-template.json", "worksheet": "/review-packets/systems/ai-autonomy.533f9d7d5a5c0633.worksheet.md", "byFingerprint": "/review-packets/by-fingerprint/533f9d7d5a5c0633ed9f3dfecd1bc1d0437d1bbf523ec9bf80b50c896d930237.json" }, "boundary": "Prepared review packet; human review has not started. This packet is not a completed review, endorsement, reviewer appointment, partnership, or authorization to act.", "governingPolicies": [ { "id": "policy-editorial-governance-001", "version": "0.1.0", "path": "/editorial-policy", "recordType": "governing-policy", "fingerprint": "1f6a1f823e8bfe891b6a707c5dce2ee2337c0bb7d915b48d6060ca82b8da1b47", "snapshot": { "id": "policy-editorial-governance-001", "version": "0.1.0", "status": "foundation-policy-controls-not-yet-staffed", "adoptedForFoundation": "2026-07-25", "title": "Editorial governance and independent review", "publisher": "GShips Project", "maintainer": "Dammon Burden", "publisherInterest": "The maintainer intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work. No entity, outside funding, customer, sponsor, or indexed-organization relationship currently exists.", "currentBoundary": "No independent domain reviewer or review council is currently appointed. Foundation records and outlines may not be represented as independently reviewed.", "reviewerSelection": [ "Publish the reviewer’s name, relevant credentials or lived expertise, review scope, compensation status, and declared conflicts with consent.", "Select for the actual claim domain rather than general prestige; include affected-community and disability-led expertise where rights or access are involved.", "Do not treat an employee, investor, customer, sponsor, source author, or directly supervised collaborator as independent for the affected claim." ], "reviewProcess": [ "Provide the exact claim, sources, locators, assumptions, counterevidence, transfer limits, and proposed evidence dimensions.", "Record approve, revise, contest, or reject at claim level; silence and event attendance never count as review.", "Publish material minority findings and the editor’s reasoned response.", "High-consequence medical, reproductive, nuclear, radiation, cybersecurity, governance, and dual-use claims require two qualified independent reviewers with complementary scopes.", "A reviewer may recuse at any time; unresolved conflicts or missing expertise block the reviewed label." ], "appealAndCorrection": [ "A correction receives a reference identifier and triage record; safety-critical allegations receive priority.", "A material editorial decision may be appealed to a reviewer not involved in the original decision once such a panel exists.", "Substantive reversals, unresolved disputes, and removed conclusions receive a dated public record that protects reporter privacy.", "No sponsor, customer, founder, or reviewer may purchase, suppress, or unilaterally assign an evidence grade." ], "publicationGate": "Public 1.0 requires named review coverage across every Academy track, documented high-consequence two-person review, a material-corrections log, reviewer conflict records, and an operating appeal path.", "correctionPath": "/corrections" } }, { "id": "policy-dual-use-001", "version": "0.1.0", "path": "/dual-use", "recordType": "governing-policy", "fingerprint": "81637e2849f9c0866d23f7174eb9a2ce522b86313167ebf5022fca122d6e506c", "snapshot": { "id": "policy-dual-use-001", "version": "0.1.0", "status": "planned-controls-not-yet-operational", "adoptedForFoundation": "2026-07-25", "title": "Civil, defensive, and rights-preserving use boundary", "summary": "GShips may research safety, resilience, logistics, communications, recovery, and cyber defense only within explicit end-use, rights, and independent-review controls. Calling an activity defensive is never sufficient by itself.", "scopeTrigger": "Apply dual-use review before accepting or materially advancing customer, funder, collaborator, operational, procurement, or publication-sensitive work whose capability, data, end use, or transfer could reasonably enable a prohibited use. Public non-actionable education still follows prohibited-content and sensitive-publication controls.", "allowedInPrinciple": [ "Safety engineering and independently assessed protection", "Resilience, graceful degradation, recovery, and disaster response", "Civil logistics, maintenance, communications, and knowledge continuity", "Cyber defense, secure software, incident response, and recovery", "Rights-preserving health, accessibility, ecology, education, and governance research" ], "prohibited": [ "Identification, tracking, prioritization, or engagement of people or assets for force, weapons, repression, or offensive operations; safety navigation, astronomy, collision avoidance, search and rescue, and independently governed planetary defense are not prohibited by this clause", "Weapons command-and-control or targeting support", "Offensive access, persistence, exploitation, or destructive cyber payloads", "Mass surveillance, biometric repression, or political-control systems", "Autonomous force application", "Coercive reproductive, medical, genetic, disability, or civic control", "Nonconsensual experimentation or treating residents as research instruments" ], "reviewRequiredBeforeAnyRelevantWork": [ "Customer, funder, collaborator, jurisdiction, beneficial-owner, and end-use screening", "Export-control and sanctions review by qualified counsel when applicable", "Written scope, allowed-use, prohibited-use, audit, termination, and incident clauses", "Independent stop-work authority with a named alternate and founder recusal", "Sensitive-publication and information-hazard review", "Whistleblowing, escalation, incident response, appeal, and anti-retaliation paths", "Aggregate transparency reporting that protects legitimate privacy and security" ], "currentBoundary": "No screening body, independent stop-work authority, contractual controls, or appeal body currently exists. Therefore no relevant customer, defense, dual-use, or operational engagement is authorized by this policy.", "changeControl": "Material changes require a dated public rationale, independent review, and may not be approved by the founder alone.", "correctionPath": "/corrections" } } ], "reviewContract": { "questions": [ { "id": "question-1", "text": "Does each evidence basis, readiness level, confidence level, rationale, and locator match the frozen sources?", "required": true }, { "id": "question-2", "text": "Are dependencies, failure modes, precursors, unknowns, Earthside benefits, and the stop gate technically and ethically bounded?", "required": true }, { "id": "question-3", "text": "Which conclusion should be approved, revised, contested, rejected, or recused from at its current fingerprint?", "required": true } ], "exclusions": [ "A system packet is not a complete spacecraft design, feasibility proof, safety case, or launch authorization.", "Context sources do not become direct support unless the record says so with an exact locator and relation." ], "requestedScopeCodes": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "governance-law-rights", "information-science", "systems-engineering" ], "dispositions": [ "approve", "revise", "contest", "reject", "recuse" ], "prohibitedInputs": [ "private legal names or contact details", "identity documents or raw credential files", "accessibility or medical records", "confidential conflict evidence", "classified, export-controlled, proprietary, or exploit material" ], "freshness": { "maximumDecisionAgeFromFreezeDays": 365, "eventOccurrenceRule": "Not applicable to this packet family." }, "completionRule": "Every primary record must receive the required number of valid, current-fingerprint approvals; every complementary scope group and required domain must be covered; any unresolved revise, contest, or reject disposition blocks publication.", "highConsequenceRule": "Named medical, reproductive, nuclear, radiation, cybersecurity, governance, and dual-use conclusions require two distinct qualified independent humans covering complementary domain-method and rights/public-interest scopes." }, "primaryRecords": [ { "recordType": "system", "recordId": "ai-autonomy", "title": "AI, LLMs, autonomy & digital twins", "publicPath": "/systems/ai-autonomy", "recordFingerprint": "28806d124fc870b3b3a457af967c5acdf047bcb5cca01431b50801a388f3e43d", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "governance-law-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "slug": "ai-autonomy", "name": "AI, LLMs, autonomy & digital twins", "shortName": "AI & autonomy", "index": 11, "thesis": "AI may change specialist workloads and the speed of learning, but every safety-critical function must remain safe and operable when every generative model is unavailable, compromised, stale, or intentionally isolated.", "currentState": [ "JPL’s Deep Space 1 Remote Agent flight experiment demonstrated bounded onboard planning, execution, and response to simulated faults; it did not demonstrate indefinite autonomous operation.", "NASA’s Starling demonstrations address distributed multi-spacecraft autonomy as a separate mission and evidence class.", "LLMs may serve bounded advisory uses such as retrieval, tutoring, translation, incident summarization, or candidate plans only with approved source revisions, exact locators, conflict handling, abstention, and independent authority. A signature can establish integrity and authenticity, not truth, currency, authorization, or safety.", "Digital-twin methods support specific testing and operational tasks within declared validity envelopes; every model is partial and may diverge as physical systems, configurations, and environments change." ], "unknowns": [ "This foundation corpus contains no published demonstration of a generative or autonomous system maintaining safe, legitimate judgment for a diverse crew across generations.", "Confabulation, invented citations, prompt or tool injection, poisoned procedures or telemetry, stale signed material, automation bias, privacy leakage, evaluator contamination, sensor spoofing, and correlated model/runtime failure threaten epistemic resilience.", "Robots still lack the broad manipulation, diagnosis, fabrication, and self-repair needed to maintain a worldship." ], "earthBenefits": [ "Bounded offline operations support, digital-twin fault ranges, knowledge arks, source provenance, skill retention, and AI-off drills may benefit remote industry, disaster response, and long-lived institutions when their limits are independently evaluated." ], "dependencies": [ "cybersecurity", "manufacturing-isru", "institutions-workforce" ], "gate": "Require independently assessed safety properties, separate physical protection layers, explicit authority gates, tested workload and timing bounds, audited provenance, bounded abstention, manual operation, recovery drills, and independent appeal.", "sources": [ { "title": "JPL Remote Agent", "url": "https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/nmp/ds1/tech/autora.html", "kind": "Primary or institutional source" }, { "title": "NASA Distributed Spacecraft Autonomy", "url": "https://www.nasa.gov/centers-and-facilities/ames/what-is-nasas-distributed-spacecraft-autonomy/", "kind": "Primary or institutional source" }, { "title": "NIST Generative AI Profile", "url": "https://www.nist.gov/publications/artificial-intelligence-risk-management-framework-generative-artificial-intelligence", "kind": "Primary or institutional source" }, { "title": "NIST Adversarial Machine Learning Taxonomy", "url": "https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/ai/100/2/e2025/final", "kind": "Primary or institutional source" } ], "failureModes": [ "Models drift, hallucinate, or inherit poisoned data while appearing authoritative to a crew that cannot call outside experts.", "A common model, sensor, power source, or update process defeats supposedly independent autonomous systems." ], "precursors": [ "Offline, provenance-preserving assistants for maintenance, science, and remote infrastructure with auditable citations.", "Formal verification, adversarial evaluation, graceful degradation, and human-recovery drills on bounded safety functions." ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-01", "title": "AI may change specialist workloads and the speed of learning, but every safety-critical function must remain safe and operable when every generative model is unavailable, compromised, stale, or intentionally isolated.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-01", "recordFingerprint": "2b2c6728e9308b88365e344f701b7c321ba36223ed5b702c44f79b6011f567f1", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "human-factors", "life-support-continuity" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-01", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "thesis", "statementRef": { "field": "thesis" }, "statement": "AI may change specialist workloads and the speed of learning, but every safety-critical function must remain safe and operable when every generative model is unavailable, compromised, stale, or intentionally isolated.", "statementFingerprint": "5632818743c650b44a28b0b19bc91a93aeb6dc6bd1c2b828cb185d8103e44d83", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "normative", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "supported", "rationale": "Current AI risk and generative-AI guidance identifies useful human-AI configurations alongside confabulation, information-integrity, privacy, security, and overreliance risks. NASA software assurance establishes an evidence discipline for safety-critical software. Requiring safe AI-off operation is a GShips resilience boundary; the cited sources do not demonstrate it across a closed habitat or generations." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "locator": "Sections 3 and 4 on AI risks, trustworthy characteristics, human-AI interaction, and the Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage functions.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Confabulation, human-AI configuration, information integrity, data privacy, value-chain risk, measurement, incident, and disclosure sections.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "locator": "Sections 1 through 4 and requirements mapping on lifecycle software assurance, software safety, objective evidence, security, independence, IV&V, maintenance, and retirement.", "relation": "direct-method" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "Representative long-duration trials showing that safety-critical functions remain equally or more reliable when they depend on a generative model, including model loss, compromise, staleness, runtime failure, and succession of operators, could narrow this boundary. Evidence of unsafe AI-off workload would require redesign rather than silent dependence.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "life-support-continuity", "human-factors" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-02", "title": "JPL’s Deep Space 1 Remote Agent flight experiment demonstrated bounded onboard planning, execution, and response to simulated faults; it did not demonstrate indefinite autonomous operation.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-02", "recordFingerprint": "38271e4711b5d6e7f7c6d2dfeb4c92a067b527bf2ccb4a97448e71da4384b806", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "spacecraft-safety" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-02", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "current state", "statementRef": { "field": "currentState", "index": 0 }, "statement": "JPL’s Deep Space 1 Remote Agent flight experiment demonstrated bounded onboard planning, execution, and response to simulated faults; it did not demonstrate indefinite autonomous operation.", "statementFingerprint": "38139ce5ca5d4acf488ddbf1aff25fb661ab4a717e1022f6ad30098d8e3eecb3", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "demonstrated", "readiness": "operational", "confidence": "strong", "rationale": "JPL's official Deep Space 1 record documents onboard planning and execution of selected subsystem activities, four injected simulated faults, a timing bug, a paused experiment, and later completion with ground-team involvement. That evidence supports a bounded flight demonstration and explicitly does not establish indefinite autonomous operation." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "locator": "Remote Agent experiment description covering high-level goals, onboard planning and execution, selected subsystems, four simulated faults, the timing error, experiment pause, ground diagnosis, and resumed run.", "relation": "direct-demonstration" }, { "sourceId": "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "locator": "Lifecycle, technology maturation, verification, validation, configuration management, technical risk, and the need to retain the tested system and operating-context boundary.", "relation": "scope-boundary" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "locator": "Lifecycle objective-evidence, software-safety, security, IV&V, anomaly, maintenance, and retirement requirements relevant to interpreting a bounded software flight test.", "relation": "context-only" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "A corrected primary mission record showing that Remote Agent did not perform the described onboard functions would change the demonstrated assessment. Longer deployments with independently reported operating duration, fault coverage, hardware scope, ground support, maintenance, and unresolved anomalies would change the readiness boundary, not the historical result.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "spacecraft-safety" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-03", "title": "NASA’s Starling demonstrations address distributed multi-spacecraft autonomy as a separate mission and evidence class.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-03", "recordFingerprint": "77f0e6c3c5d9c49ce7e4af054dbcf2fe76ad2da3bd702417d4593e5eff14272a", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "spacecraft-safety" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-03", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "current state", "statementRef": { "field": "currentState", "index": 1 }, "statement": "NASA’s Starling demonstrations address distributed multi-spacecraft autonomy as a separate mission and evidence class.", "statementFingerprint": "c54c1011b881a8bdc691d715e5bd9e5562f64ea0532a32fdb4db9fd644828aff", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "demonstrated", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "strong", "rationale": "NASA's flight-results record describes Starling as a four-CubeSat technology demonstration and reports distributed science autonomy across three spacecraft, crosslink networking, navigation, and maneuver-planning outcomes with explicit limitations. Those objectives, architecture, date, and scale differ materially from Deep Space 1 and from generation-ship autonomy." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "locator": "Mission description and result sections covering four 6U CubeSats, crosslink networking, StarFOX navigation, ROMEO maneuver planning, distributed science autonomy across three spacecraft, and limitations on the full planned demonstrations.", "relation": "direct-demonstration" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "locator": "Deep Space 1 single-spacecraft Remote Agent experiment scope, selected subsystems, high-level goal planning, simulated-fault set, duration, and ground-team role.", "relation": "context-only" }, { "sourceId": "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "locator": "Technology assessment, technical-performance measures, verification, validation, and lifecycle context used to keep demonstrations within their requirements and test boundaries.", "relation": "direct-method" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "New NASA corrections or primary flight data that materially revise Starling's spacecraft count, completed objectives, autonomy scope, or stated limitations would change this assessment. A larger or longer swarm demonstration would raise readiness for its declared tasks but would remain a separate evidence class from habitat governance and maintenance.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "spacecraft-safety" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-04", "title": "LLMs may serve bounded advisory uses such as retrieval, tutoring, translation, incident summarization, or candidate plans only with approved source revisions, exact locators, conflict handling, abstention, and independent authority. A signature can establish integrity and authenticity, not truth, currency, authorization, or safety.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-04", "recordFingerprint": "56fe8de4eacc7361e91be29cd7d3acd32945264b2202031883139d03e96a065b", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "child-rights", "culture", "education", "governance", "privacy", "surveillance" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "governance-law-rights" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "src-pn-ccsds-oais" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-04", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "current state", "statementRef": { "field": "currentState", "index": 2 }, "statement": "LLMs may serve bounded advisory uses such as retrieval, tutoring, translation, incident summarization, or candidate plans only with approved source revisions, exact locators, conflict handling, abstention, and independent authority. A signature can establish integrity and authenticity, not truth, currency, authorization, or safety.", "statementFingerprint": "8430cc65711f660fb33fc765eb87afa4f37b2486d9cbe0210ab0923d1ddc7500", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "proposed", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "supported", "rationale": "Generative-AI and education guidance documents retrieval, tutoring, translation, confabulation, privacy, bias, provenance, and human-agency considerations. No cited evidence validates an LLM as independent authority for safety, education, culture, or governance." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Confabulation, information integrity, privacy, harmful bias, provenance, human-AI configuration, evaluation, and incident-disclosure risks and actions.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "locator": "Chapters 2–4 and policy framework, human agency, inclusion, linguistic diversity, data protection, age, validation, and educational purpose.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-ccsds-oais", "locator": "Sections 2–4, source content, representation information, provenance, context, fixity, access, and designated-community concepts.", "relation": "context-only" }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "locator": "Executive summary and chapters on people, products, provision, personnel, policy, services, and barriers to equitable access.", "relation": "context-only" }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "locator": "Perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust principles, success criteria, conformance requirements, and technology-neutral scope.", "relation": "context-only" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work that may include offline AI support; no model vendor, school, archive, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship currently exists." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "Independent evaluations showing that a broader LLM authority model provides equal or stronger provenance, privacy, abstention, error detection, cultural plurality, child protection, appeal, and safe AI-off fallback could revise these boundaries.", "highConsequence": [ "education", "privacy", "surveillance", "culture", "governance", "child-rights" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-05", "title": "Digital-twin methods support specific testing and operational tasks within declared validity envelopes; every model is partial and may diverge as physical systems, configurations, and environments change.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-05", "recordFingerprint": "ecccb3fd9bc72f211c52006694627970e079c0285b2fa385aa7354f895940e80", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "life-support-continuity", "modeling-simulation" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-05", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "current state", "statementRef": { "field": "currentState", "index": 3 }, "statement": "Digital-twin methods support specific testing and operational tasks within declared validity envelopes; every model is partial and may diverge as physical systems, configurations, and environments change.", "statementFingerprint": "72f48a63abfb83e87388f563ad3c0f497ffb27d7a6ea49936ee414664f83bb6e", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "observed", "readiness": "major-scale-up", "confidence": "strong", "rationale": "NASA's active modeling-and-simulation standard requires intended use, requirements, credibility products, verification, validation, uncertainty, configuration, and acceptance. NIST describes digital-twin operations plus security and trust concerns, while NASA's foundational paper presents a lifecycle concept. Together they support bounded utility and the expectation of divergence as systems, data, and environments change." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "locator": "Sections 1 through 5 on intended use, M&S requirements, lifecycle, credibility products, verification, validation, uncertainty, configuration management, use assessment, and acceptance.", "relation": "direct-method" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356", "locator": "Sections 2 through 6 on concepts, components, operations, scenarios, and applications, and sections 7 and 8 on cybersecurity and trust considerations.", "relation": "direct-observation" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "locator": "Digital-twin paradigm, integrated models and vehicle data, lifecycle vision, and future-research framing.", "relation": "context-only" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "Long-duration evidence that a digital twin maintains independently measured and calibrated error bounds through sensor drift, hardware substitution, software migration, environmental change, adversarial data, and changing operators would narrow the divergence claim. Undetected out-of-envelope use or common-mode validation failures would strengthen it.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "modeling-simulation", "life-support-continuity" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-06", "title": "This foundation corpus contains no published demonstration of a generative or autonomous system maintaining safe, legitimate judgment for a diverse crew across generations.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-06", "recordFingerprint": "fe5dbd4bf05ae0a9f0ab04b432ded2e149b963bd465b088f67bad33c161b5d48", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "governance", "human-rights", "life-support-continuity" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-06", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "unknown", "statementRef": { "field": "unknowns", "index": 0 }, "statement": "This foundation corpus contains no published demonstration of a generative or autonomous system maintaining safe, legitimate judgment for a diverse crew across generations.", "statementFingerprint": "665b8c95ef2d0f82efd58c8074fc4d3dc7b3941abf983fc8ecdcc3aaa18a48ec", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "observed", "readiness": "no-known-path", "confidence": "supported", "rationale": "The bounded primary corpus contains finite spacecraft autonomy demonstrations, current AI risk frameworks, and normative ethics guidance. It contains no demonstration of a generative or autonomous system maintaining safe and legitimate judgment for a diverse crew across generations. This is a bounded-corpus finding rather than a universal proof of absence." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "locator": "Finite Remote Agent flight-experiment scope, selected subsystems, simulated-fault set, timing bug, pause, and ground-team involvement.", "relation": "direct-demonstration" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "locator": "Finite four-CubeSat technology-demonstration architecture, task-specific autonomy results across three spacecraft, and reported mission limitations.", "relation": "direct-demonstration" }, { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Current generative-AI risks and management actions, including confabulation, privacy, information integrity, human-AI configuration, and value-chain concerns.", "relation": "scope-boundary" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "locator": "Human dignity, rights, proportionality, safety, fairness, privacy, oversight, responsibility, transparency, governance, and ethical-impact provisions.", "relation": "scope-boundary" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "A published, independently audited multigenerational demonstration involving changing people, institutions, hardware, models, conflicts, rights, and life-safety decisions would falsify this bounded finding if it actually established safe and legitimate judgment. Short benchmarks, dialogue quality, or isolated technical autonomy would not.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "governance", "human-rights", "life-support-continuity" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-07", "title": "Confabulation, invented citations, prompt or tool injection, poisoned procedures or telemetry, stale signed material, automation bias, privacy leakage, evaluator contamination, sensor spoofing, and correlated model/runtime failure threaten epistemic resilience.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-07", "recordFingerprint": "768bb2389d46e55e38419c092772ff24a490b471c33fed16d5351f70c3fb3f7c", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "dual-use", "epistemic-resilience", "privacy" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety", "dual-use-risk" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "dual-use-risk", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356", "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-07", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "unknown", "statementRef": { "field": "unknowns", "index": 1 }, "statement": "Confabulation, invented citations, prompt or tool injection, poisoned procedures or telemetry, stale signed material, automation bias, privacy leakage, evaluator contamination, sensor spoofing, and correlated model/runtime failure threaten epistemic resilience.", "statementFingerprint": "f9af4ea4bf1752210948601b3d5cadda2463ae7943e95fb326b42da49b1930e8", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "observed", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "strong", "rationale": "NIST's GenAI Profile and adversarial-ML taxonomy directly document confabulation, information-integrity, privacy, poisoning, evasion, and misuse risks and their mitigation limits. Digital-twin and secure-development guidance adds sensor, data, component, toolchain, lifecycle, and correlated dependency concerns. Application to multigenerational epistemic resilience remains a systems inference." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Risk sections on confabulation, data privacy, information integrity, human-AI configuration, value chains, and related governance, measurement, and incident actions.", "relation": "direct-observation" }, { "sourceId": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "locator": "Taxonomy chapters for predictive- and generative-AI poisoning, evasion, privacy, misuse, lifecycle stages, attacker capabilities, and mitigation limitations.", "relation": "direct-observation" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "locator": "AI-specific secure-development additions addressing model, data, code, dependency, evaluation, release, provenance, and vulnerability-response practices.", "relation": "direct-observation" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356", "locator": "Sections 7 and 8 on digital-twin cybersecurity, trust, sensors, connections, data, components, operations, and accepted-quality concerns.", "relation": "direct-observation" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "Representative end-to-end evaluations should separately measure each risk, severe outcomes, correlated failures, operator calibration, privacy loss, abstention, and recovery under offline conditions. Strong replicated evidence that a named risk is inapplicable to the specified architecture would narrow the enumeration; a safety prompt or average benchmark would not.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "privacy", "dual-use", "epistemic-resilience" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-08", "title": "Robots still lack the broad manipulation, diagnosis, fabrication, and self-repair needed to maintain a worldship.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-08", "recordFingerprint": "8e0a459bb7f93a19fc0cacea0dc2b7eb61b1dcfbe408d3a0ec75190c2caf09fb", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "life-support-continuity", "manufacturing", "spacecraft-safety" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-im-gao-isam-2025", "src-im-nasa-isam-2025", "src-im-nasa-ism-portfolio-2025" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-08", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "unknown", "statementRef": { "field": "unknowns", "index": 2 }, "statement": "Robots still lack the broad manipulation, diagnosis, fabrication, and self-repair needed to maintain a worldship.", "statementFingerprint": "4115a812d070972b7c5fb82af5c8c45179ca417d682abe4bf564d18c85e655df", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "observed", "readiness": "breakthrough-dependent", "confidence": "strong", "rationale": "NASA and GAO surveys describe task-specific servicing, inspection, fabrication, assembly, robotics, and autonomy efforts while documenting limited demonstrations and separate development paths. No cited system integrates broad manipulation, diagnosis, fabrication, qualification, installation, and self-repair sufficient to maintain a worldship." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-im-nasa-isam-2025", "locator": "Capability taxonomy and state-of-play survey for inspection, servicing, repair, assembly, manufacturing, construction, robotics, autonomy, and present demonstrations.", "relation": "direct-observation" }, { "sourceId": "src-im-nasa-ism-portfolio-2025", "locator": "Separate portfolio paths for polymers, metals, electronics, welding, recycling, biomanufacturing, verification, autonomy, and development status.", "relation": "limitation" }, { "sourceId": "src-im-gao-isam-2025", "locator": "Pages 8 through 24 on demonstrated servicing, lower manufacturing maturity, robotic and test limitations, qualification, standards, adoption barriers, and program dependencies.", "relation": "direct-observation" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "An independently replicated robotic system that diagnoses unfamiliar failures, manipulates diverse damaged hardware, produces and qualifies replacements, installs them, restores its own tools and sensors, and repeats under realistic habitat constraints would raise readiness. Narrow demonstrations would change only their declared task boundaries.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "spacecraft-safety", "manufacturing", "life-support-continuity" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-09", "title": "Bounded offline operations support, digital-twin fault ranges, knowledge arks, source provenance, skill retention, and AI-off drills may benefit remote industry, disaster response, and long-lived institutions when their limits are independently evaluated.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-09", "recordFingerprint": "de198a3912f3c2315c4cbf9edf97b6e782e38a95404da605e1f57c895c550804", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "cybersecurity", "education", "governance", "labor", "privacy", "surveillance" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-cu-ilo-r208", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "src-pn-nasa-dtn" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-09", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "earth benefit", "statementRef": { "field": "earthBenefits", "index": 0 }, "statement": "Bounded offline operations support, digital-twin fault ranges, knowledge arks, source provenance, skill retention, and AI-off drills may benefit remote industry, disaster response, and long-lived institutions when their limits are independently evaluated.", "statementFingerprint": "fe64b827c9316cbc010f7fcce9ebf4e955689bcb6e5c90c9311f58a8145533a9", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "proposed", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "tentative", "rationale": "Archival, apprenticeship, delay-tolerant networking, and AI-risk frameworks support bounded offline retrieval, local continuity, provenance, and recovery exercises. Their combined benefit to remote industry and long-lived institutions requires evaluated deployments rather than extrapolation." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Generative-AI governance, provenance, evaluation, confabulation, privacy, information-integrity, security, and human-AI risk actions.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-nasa-dtn", "locator": "Store-and-forward architecture, disruption and delay use cases, space implementation, and communication boundary.", "relation": "context-only" }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "locator": "Sections 1–5, delay-tolerant bundle architecture, blocks, processing, endpoint behavior, reporting, and assumptions.", "relation": "direct-normative-authority" }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-ilo-r208", "locator": "Structured learning, qualified supervision, inclusion, safety, assessment, recognition, compensation, and apprentice protections.", "relation": "context-only" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work that may include offline operations support; no operator, AI vendor, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship currently exists." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "Prospective deployments showing no measurable improvement in local recovery, source use, skill retention, privacy, or service continuity—or unacceptable automation dependence and surveillance—would weaken or reverse this benefit claim.", "highConsequence": [ "education", "labor", "privacy", "surveillance", "cybersecurity", "governance" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim", "recordId": "claim-11-10", "title": "Require independently assessed safety properties, separate physical protection layers, explicit authority gates, tested workload and timing bounds, audited provenance, bounded abstention, manual operation, recovery drills, and independent appeal.", "publicPath": "/claims/claim-11-10", "recordFingerprint": "4c48cfe2109462b8663ca6f17458b61b4867bd93f22b1e45b23700765e45589f", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 2, "highConsequenceDomains": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "dual-use", "governance", "life-support-continuity", "privacy" ], "requiredDomainCodes": [ "defensive-cyber-safety", "dual-use-risk", "governance-law-rights" ], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "domain-method", "scopeClass": "domain-method", "oneOf": [ "ai-knowledge-assurance", "defensive-cyber-safety", "dual-use-risk", "governance-law-rights" ] }, { "id": "rights-public-interest", "scopeClass": "rights-public-interest", "oneOf": [ "affected-public-rights" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [ "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1" ], "snapshot": { "id": "claim-11-10", "systemSlug": "ai-autonomy", "kind": "decision gate", "statementRef": { "field": "gate" }, "statement": "Require independently assessed safety properties, separate physical protection layers, explicit authority gates, tested workload and timing bounds, audited provenance, bounded abstention, manual operation, recovery drills, and independent appeal.", "statementFingerprint": "beea132c796130a4d546c31fc0fbc4b09af6be86340d99bd67b05ccf17fadba6", "assessment": { "status": "editorial-assessed", "basis": "normative", "readiness": "early-research", "confidence": "supported", "rationale": "The gate synthesizes present software-safety, modeling-credibility, AI-risk, generative-risk, secure-development, and systems-engineering methods. Physical protection, independent assessment, explicit authority, provenance, workload bounds, abstention, manual operation, recovery, and appeal are separable safeguards; no cited source validates them as one generation-ship assurance case." }, "citations": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "locator": "Lifecycle software assurance and safety requirements covering objective evidence, security, requirements mapping, independence, IV&V, analysis, testing, maintenance, and retirement.", "relation": "direct-method" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "locator": "Intended-use, requirements, credibility, verification, validation, uncertainty, configuration, acceptance, and results-communication requirements for models and simulations.", "relation": "direct-model" }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "locator": "Trustworthy characteristics and Govern, Map, Measure, Manage functions, including human-AI configuration, evaluation context, risk tolerance, monitoring, and accountability.", "relation": "direct-method" }, { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "locator": "Confabulation, privacy, information integrity, human-AI configuration, value-chain risk, measurement, red-team, incident, and disclosure actions.", "relation": "direct-method" }, { "sourceId": "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "locator": "Requirements, interfaces, verification, validation, configuration management, technical risk, decision analysis, and lifecycle review processes.", "relation": "direct-method" } ], "contextSourceIds": [ "core-11-1", "core-11-2", "core-11-3", "core-11-4" ], "editorialProvenance": { "status": "substantive-editorial-review", "reviewers": [ "GShips Project editorial synthesis" ], "conflicts": [ "Publisher intends to explore a commercial venture based on some GShips work; no entity, funding, customer, sponsor, or partner relationship with cited organizations is reported." ] }, "whatWouldChange": "A legitimate, independently reviewed assurance framework could replace this gate if it demonstrates equal or stronger physical containment, authority, timing, workload, provenance, abstention, AI-off operation, local recovery, rights, and appeal. Repeated representative failures under injected faults should strengthen or narrow individual requirements, not waive them.", "highConsequence": [ "ai-autonomy", "cybersecurity", "governance", "privacy", "dual-use", "life-support-continuity" ] } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "title": "The Digital Twin Paradigm for Future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles", "publicPath": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20120008178", "recordFingerprint": "7dc587fc2cc5f55374f633dae2558909763aeb1c1337e479fd947424badc95ad", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "title": "The Digital Twin Paradigm for Future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles", "authors": [ "Edward H. Glaessgen", "David S. Stargel" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2012, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20120008178", "kind": "government-concept-paper", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Early digital-twin concept integrating models and vehicle data across a lifecycle, presented as a future paradigm and research direction rather than an operational certification." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "title": "Deep Space 1: Autonomous Remote Agent", "publicPath": "https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/nmp/ds1/tech/autora.html", "recordFingerprint": "ec23247e17991e05a5e88a376fd8f21d79009c4d5dff22e7cc230af82f876ac1", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "title": "Deep Space 1: Autonomous Remote Agent", "authors": [ "NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory" ], "publisher": "NASA/JPL", "year": 1999, "url": "https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/nmp/ds1/tech/autora.html", "kind": "official-flight-experiment-record", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Official account of bounded onboard planning, execution, selected-subsystem control, four simulated faults, a timing bug, experiment pause, and ground-team involvement. Browser-accessible official content returns HTTP 403 to automated checks." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "title": "Software Assurance and Software Safety Standard", "publicPath": "https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/NASA/NASA-STD-87398", "recordFingerprint": "d6427b989658379d4754ab20c93d5cf9535fe23c6ca356c7d311a285029d3140", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "title": "Software Assurance and Software Safety Standard", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2022, "url": "https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/NASA/NASA-STD-87398", "kind": "active-software-assurance-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "NASA lifecycle requirements for software assurance, software safety, security, objective evidence, requirements mapping, independent verification and validation, maintenance, and retirement." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "title": "Starling CubeSat Swarm Technology Demonstration Flight Results", "publicPath": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240006994", "recordFingerprint": "c420a1d5ded26b43b4f0db1a9c8c6b965addc96d75026b3ad381bfaa88cd7a77", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "title": "Starling CubeSat Swarm Technology Demonstration Flight Results", "authors": [ "NASA Starling Project Team" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2024, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240006994", "kind": "official-flight-demonstration-report", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Mission architecture and bounded results for networking, optical navigation, autonomous maneuver planning, and distributed science autonomy across a four-CubeSat demonstration." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)", "publicPath": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1", "recordFingerprint": "44ed404a35aadd12a293b2b0f7e8939ef43b5d3c4114c9d456aaec429fd5e411", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)", "authors": [ "Elham Tabassi" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2023, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1", "kind": "government-ai-risk-management-framework", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Voluntary sociotechnical AI risk framework defining trustworthy characteristics and the Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage functions; not a generation-ship assurance standard." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "title": "Secure Software Development Practices for Generative AI and Dual-Use Foundation Models: An SSDF Community Profile", "publicPath": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218A", "recordFingerprint": "83d3d0fd2357e1ad2ee1db05b3a6d25921c7e4abd3125132831fff5213ef2148", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "title": "Secure Software Development Practices for Generative AI and Dual-Use Foundation Models: An SSDF Community Profile", "authors": [ "Harold Booth", "Murugiah Souppaya", "Apostol Vassilev", "Michael Ogata", "Martin Stanley", "Karen Scarfone" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2024, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218A", "kind": "government-ai-secure-development-guidance", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "AI-specific additions to secure-development practices for organizational preparation, artifact protection, well-secured production, evaluation, release, and vulnerability response." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "title": "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence", "publicPath": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence?hub=1063", "recordFingerprint": "5df6900912cc9c2a8b02845211ccf6dff726220b3600e353bb6eaf2e75f0767d", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "title": "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence", "authors": [ "UNESCO General Conference" ], "publisher": "UNESCO", "year": 2021, "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence?hub=1063", "kind": "intergovernmental-normative-recommendation", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Normative values, principles, and policy actions concerning human dignity, rights, proportionality, safety, fairness, privacy, oversight, responsibility, transparency, governance, and ethical impact." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "title": "Adversarial Machine Learning: A Taxonomy and Terminology of Attacks and Mitigations", "publicPath": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-2e2025", "recordFingerprint": "1573c29a25a7b8302f31f3a676e7e80866b6ff58e0c0718e60a38f52ecbd3e5a", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "title": "Adversarial Machine Learning: A Taxonomy and Terminology of Attacks and Mitigations", "authors": [ "Apostol Vassilev", "Alina Oprea", "Alie Fordyce", "Hyrum Anderson", "Xander Davies", "Maia Hamin" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2025, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-2e2025", "kind": "government-ai-security-taxonomy", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Predictive- and generative-AI evasion, poisoning, privacy, and misuse taxonomy, lifecycle stages, attacker capabilities, mitigations, and limitations." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "title": "Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research", "publicPath": "https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693", "recordFingerprint": "ed1746a19077b3ecd178cc5bfff679bf94370ef3e3038770e28b28e0fb515e99", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "title": "Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research", "authors": [ "United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization" ], "publisher": "UNESCO", "year": 2023, "url": "https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693", "kind": "un-education-and-ai-guidance", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Human agency, inclusion, linguistic and cultural diversity, data protection, age appropriateness, validation, governance, and educational-use guidance." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "title": "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2", "publicPath": "https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/", "recordFingerprint": "36d83ac5a6eceb59dcdfb30918e2154e158d015fa3c29031673845a594599b7e", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "title": "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2", "authors": [ "World Wide Web Consortium" ], "publisher": "W3C", "year": 2023, "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/", "kind": "international-web-accessibility-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Technology-neutral principles, guidelines, success criteria, conformance requirements, and limits for perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust web content." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "title": "Global Report on Assistive Technology", "publicPath": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451", "recordFingerprint": "8453de49aa65cf960e18570b9c038ea2a575728ec37a5a198392e3abd1c6bb36", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "title": "Global Report on Assistive Technology", "authors": [ "World Health Organization", "United Nations Children's Fund" ], "publisher": "World Health Organization", "year": 2022, "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451", "kind": "un-global-health-evidence-report", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Global evidence and recommendations concerning assistive-technology access, people, products, provision, personnel, policy, services, and persistent access gaps." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "title": "RFC 9171: Bundle Protocol Version 7", "publicPath": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171.html", "recordFingerprint": "2cc953af46ae7cc31aca7ff9b9cba37bc0bdc5a6f045b41a54e790affdba4395", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "title": "RFC 9171: Bundle Protocol Version 7", "authors": [ "Scott Burleigh", "Kevin Fall", "Edward Birrane" ], "publisher": "Internet Engineering Task Force", "year": 2022, "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171.html", "kind": "internet-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Delay-tolerant networking architecture, bundle format, node processing, endpoint behavior, and explicit disrupted-network assumptions." } }, { "recordType": "claim-source", "recordId": "src-pn-nasa-dtn", "title": "Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking", "publicPath": "https://www.nasa.gov/communicating-with-missions/delay-disruption-tolerant-networking/", "recordFingerprint": "3940190c4eaa98e8cbef9e104dffd5f111bb61b614373849ee0b327c593d7e75", "reviewRequirements": { "minimumIndependentApprovals": 1, "highConsequenceDomains": [], "requiredDomainCodes": [], "requiredComplementaryScopeGroups": [ { "id": "bounded-competence", "scopeClass": "bounded-competence", "oneOf": [ "information-science" ] } ], "unresolvedNegativeFindingBlocksPublication": true }, "referenceIds": [], "snapshot": { "id": "src-pn-nasa-dtn", "title": "Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2026, "url": "https://www.nasa.gov/communicating-with-missions/delay-disruption-tolerant-networking/", "kind": "active-technology-and-operations-record", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Store-and-forward bundle operation, mission uses, High-Rate DTN testing, and bounded terrestrial and space-network applicability." } } ], "linkedRecords": [], "referenceSnapshots": [ { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "7dc587fc2cc5f55374f633dae2558909763aeb1c1337e479fd947424badc95ad", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "title": "The Digital Twin Paradigm for Future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles", "authors": [ "Edward H. Glaessgen", "David S. Stargel" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2012, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20120008178", "kind": "government-concept-paper", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Early digital-twin concept integrating models and vehicle data across a lifecycle, presented as a future paradigm and research direction rather than an operational certification." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "ec23247e17991e05a5e88a376fd8f21d79009c4d5dff22e7cc230af82f876ac1", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "title": "Deep Space 1: Autonomous Remote Agent", "authors": [ "NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory" ], "publisher": "NASA/JPL", "year": 1999, "url": "https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/nmp/ds1/tech/autora.html", "kind": "official-flight-experiment-record", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Official account of bounded onboard planning, execution, selected-subsystem control, four simulated faults, a timing bug, experiment pause, and ground-team involvement. Browser-accessible official content returns HTTP 403 to automated checks." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "8f6e834f09954fef302c7b3ecfb02347690909841cabd58f172c74eac18e2b7f", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-models-simulations-7009b", "title": "Standard for Models and Simulations", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2024, "url": "https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/nasa/nasa-std-7009", "kind": "active-modeling-simulation-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "NASA requirements and guidance for intended use, model lifecycle, credibility products, verification, validation, uncertainty, configuration management, results, and acceptance." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "d6427b989658379d4754ab20c93d5cf9535fe23c6ca356c7d311a285029d3140", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "title": "Software Assurance and Software Safety Standard", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2022, "url": "https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/NASA/NASA-STD-87398", "kind": "active-software-assurance-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "NASA lifecycle requirements for software assurance, software safety, security, objective evidence, requirements mapping, independent verification and validation, maintenance, and retirement." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "c420a1d5ded26b43b4f0db1a9c8c6b965addc96d75026b3ad381bfaa88cd7a77", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "title": "Starling CubeSat Swarm Technology Demonstration Flight Results", "authors": [ "NASA Starling Project Team" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2024, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240006994", "kind": "official-flight-demonstration-report", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Mission architecture and bounded results for networking, optical navigation, autonomous maneuver planning, and distributed science autonomy across a four-CubeSat demonstration." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "44ed404a35aadd12a293b2b0f7e8939ef43b5d3c4114c9d456aaec429fd5e411", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)", "authors": [ "Elham Tabassi" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2023, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1", "kind": "government-ai-risk-management-framework", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Voluntary sociotechnical AI risk framework defining trustworthy characteristics and the Govern, Map, Measure, and Manage functions; not a generation-ship assurance standard." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "500f59e2c271844456dfb2599f2dd243c83fe149ff6345a5de803fee3cdc300e", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nist-digital-twin-8356", "title": "Security and Trust Considerations for Digital Twin Technology", "authors": [ "Jeff Voas", "Peter Mell", "Phillip Laplante", "Vartan Piroumian" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2025, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.IR.8356", "kind": "government-digital-twin-trust-report", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Digital-twin concepts, components, operations, use scenarios, applications, cybersecurity considerations, and trust limitations; does not define or certify a universal digital twin." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "83d3d0fd2357e1ad2ee1db05b3a6d25921c7e4abd3125132831fff5213ef2148", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "title": "Secure Software Development Practices for Generative AI and Dual-Use Foundation Models: An SSDF Community Profile", "authors": [ "Harold Booth", "Murugiah Souppaya", "Apostol Vassilev", "Michael Ogata", "Martin Stanley", "Karen Scarfone" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2024, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218A", "kind": "government-ai-secure-development-guidance", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "AI-specific additions to secure-development practices for organizational preparation, artifact protection, well-secured production, evaluation, release, and vulnerability response." } }, { "sourceId": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "5df6900912cc9c2a8b02845211ccf6dff726220b3600e353bb6eaf2e75f0767d", "snapshot": { "id": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "title": "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence", "authors": [ "UNESCO General Conference" ], "publisher": "UNESCO", "year": 2021, "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence?hub=1063", "kind": "intergovernmental-normative-recommendation", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Normative values, principles, and policy actions concerning human dignity, rights, proportionality, safety, fairness, privacy, oversight, responsibility, transparency, governance, and ethical impact." } }, { "sourceId": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "1573c29a25a7b8302f31f3a676e7e80866b6ff58e0c0718e60a38f52ecbd3e5a", "snapshot": { "id": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "title": "Adversarial Machine Learning: A Taxonomy and Terminology of Attacks and Mitigations", "authors": [ "Apostol Vassilev", "Alina Oprea", "Alie Fordyce", "Hyrum Anderson", "Xander Davies", "Maia Hamin" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2025, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-2e2025", "kind": "government-ai-security-taxonomy", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Predictive- and generative-AI evasion, poisoning, privacy, and misuse taxonomy, lifecycle stages, attacker capabilities, mitigations, and limitations." } }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-ilo-r208", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "7f0ffeba7f122098cb810e1767cffa060cd7dec7286cd0ebbe89aefd76423fe7", "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-ilo-r208", "title": "Quality Apprenticeships Recommendation, 2023 (No. 208)", "authors": [ "International Labour Organization" ], "publisher": "International Labour Organization", "year": 2023, "url": "https://www.ilo.org/resource/other/r208-quality-apprenticeships-recommendation-2023", "kind": "international-labour-recommendation", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Recommendation text on structured learning, agreements, inclusion, worker participation, safety, compensation, mentoring, assessment, qualifications, and apprentices' rights." } }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "ed1746a19077b3ecd178cc5bfff679bf94370ef3e3038770e28b28e0fb515e99", "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "title": "Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research", "authors": [ "United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization" ], "publisher": "UNESCO", "year": 2023, "url": "https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693", "kind": "un-education-and-ai-guidance", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Human agency, inclusion, linguistic and cultural diversity, data protection, age appropriateness, validation, governance, and educational-use guidance." } }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "36d83ac5a6eceb59dcdfb30918e2154e158d015fa3c29031673845a594599b7e", "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "title": "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2", "authors": [ "World Wide Web Consortium" ], "publisher": "W3C", "year": 2023, "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/", "kind": "international-web-accessibility-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Technology-neutral principles, guidelines, success criteria, conformance requirements, and limits for perceivable, operable, understandable, and robust web content." } }, { "sourceId": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "8453de49aa65cf960e18570b9c038ea2a575728ec37a5a198392e3abd1c6bb36", "snapshot": { "id": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "title": "Global Report on Assistive Technology", "authors": [ "World Health Organization", "United Nations Children's Fund" ], "publisher": "World Health Organization", "year": 2022, "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451", "kind": "un-global-health-evidence-report", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Global evidence and recommendations concerning assistive-technology access, people, products, provision, personnel, policy, services, and persistent access gaps." } }, { "sourceId": "src-im-gao-isam-2025", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "f34a4c41466659821eede3dfde4b257733374fd7d50c558c8f7d1bbb1078a8e7", "snapshot": { "id": "src-im-gao-isam-2025", "title": "In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing: Benefits, Challenges, and Policy Options", "authors": [ "U.S. Government Accountability Office" ], "publisher": "U.S. Government Accountability Office", "year": 2025, "url": "https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-25-107555", "kind": "government-technology-assessment", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Independent government assessment of demonstrated servicing, limited robotic use, test-access gaps, emerging standards, serviceability, costs, and policy options." } }, { "sourceId": "src-im-nasa-isam-2025", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "4ee5cffad11832f3a52484c44217ef44f63bb5d5da9e3d47186f35fea1ab886d", "snapshot": { "id": "src-im-nasa-isam-2025", "title": "In-Space Servicing, Assembly, and Manufacturing State of Play: 2025 Edition", "authors": [ "John Mulvaney", "Dale Arney", "Christina Williams", "Jose Morel", "Christopher Stockdale", "Christopher Whitlock", "Vishruth Balaji" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2025, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250008988", "kind": "institutional-state-of-the-art", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "NASA peer-committee-reviewed taxonomy and status survey of inspection, servicing, assembly, fabrication, repair, construction, and enabling capabilities." } }, { "sourceId": "src-im-nasa-ism-portfolio-2025", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "06cea319893cf8240cb44a60e3ce511ca3f41a48b46c87b9915567ef6fc29ba1", "snapshot": { "id": "src-im-nasa-ism-portfolio-2025", "title": "In-Space Manufacturing Portfolio Plan", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA Technical Reports Server", "year": 2025, "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20250004020", "kind": "institutional-technology-portfolio", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Program record for polymer, metal, electronics, welding, recycling, inspection, and biomanufacturing work, including the incomplete ISS Refabricator demonstration." } }, { "sourceId": "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "3337ce334909311c3ab1c604773fdcc31a01dd8e0e781d040debd3b6e33cea22", "snapshot": { "id": "src-mp-nasa-se-handbook", "title": "NASA Systems Engineering Handbook", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2016, "url": "https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/nasa_systems_engineering_handbook_0.pdf", "kind": "institutional-handbook", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Lifecycle, requirements, interfaces, verification, validation, decision analysis, and risk." } }, { "sourceId": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "4066eeecafdc810d0ad828dd8bd53e4a05daeb6b03dde36fafe581976402cb59", "snapshot": { "id": "src-pa-nist-ai-600-1", "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework: Generative Artificial Intelligence Profile", "authors": [ "National Institute of Standards and Technology" ], "publisher": "NIST", "year": 2024, "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1", "kind": "government-risk-management-profile", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Generative-AI governance, provenance, evaluation, security, confabulation, privacy, and incident disclosure." } }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-ccsds-oais", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "d130fb645b4838a8e446a7a861ad942052dcb493afd6bd7c431bd9e863999212", "snapshot": { "id": "src-pn-ccsds-oais", "title": "Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System", "authors": [ "Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems" ], "publisher": "CCSDS", "year": 2024, "url": "https://ccsds.org/searchpubs/entry/3054/", "kind": "space-data-systems-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "OAIS information packages, representation information, designated communities, preservation planning, access, and archive-management functions." } }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "2cc953af46ae7cc31aca7ff9b9cba37bc0bdc5a6f045b41a54e790affdba4395", "snapshot": { "id": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "title": "RFC 9171: Bundle Protocol Version 7", "authors": [ "Scott Burleigh", "Kevin Fall", "Edward Birrane" ], "publisher": "Internet Engineering Task Force", "year": 2022, "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171.html", "kind": "internet-standard", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Delay-tolerant networking architecture, bundle format, node processing, endpoint behavior, and explicit disrupted-network assumptions." } }, { "sourceId": "src-pn-nasa-dtn", "sourceRecordType": "claim-source", "sourceFingerprint": "3940190c4eaa98e8cbef9e104dffd5f111bb61b614373849ee0b327c593d7e75", "snapshot": { "id": "src-pn-nasa-dtn", "title": "Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking", "authors": [ "National Aeronautics and Space Administration" ], "publisher": "NASA", "year": 2026, "url": "https://www.nasa.gov/communicating-with-missions/delay-disruption-tolerant-networking/", "kind": "active-technology-and-operations-record", "checkedAt": "2026-07-25", "scopeNote": "Store-and-forward bundle operation, mission uses, High-Rate DTN testing, and bounded terrestrial and space-network applicability." } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "853ead2521061322a9486fca8015fa9e3ed5086e3759b3fa2c8cb3f280e68097", "snapshot": { "title": "The Digital Twin Paradigm for Future NASA and U.S. Air Force Vehicles", "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20120008178", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nasa-digital-twin-2012" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "55d698efe8b9a1379cbd2d7d75340ab7e897bdef47564802cdb11e85fe77326a", "snapshot": { "title": "Deep Space 1: Autonomous Remote Agent", "url": "https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/nmp/ds1/tech/autora.html", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nasa-ds1-remote-agent" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "887911d94419be88ccb940fe7a450d8081cdea0c77979251b57aaf417367972e", "snapshot": { "title": "Software Assurance and Software Safety Standard", "url": "https://standards.nasa.gov/standard/NASA/NASA-STD-87398", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nasa-software-assurance-87398b" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "5d50a27e5ce7a99a232ef82e7fdc8173c9f5b98f1b50e4a2951776cf720ec64c", "snapshot": { "title": "Starling CubeSat Swarm Technology Demonstration Flight Results", "url": "https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20240006994", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nasa-starling-flight-results" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "0e48c8532f9ffe9b7ab996c7fbb72ffbcc1311320e1a9e19347b500d0b52f7a7", "snapshot": { "title": "Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0)", "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nist-ai-rmf-100-1" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "6c086e530f3897c0a03632aa6bfc643c95def641303687c4f52240c5434a2f94", "snapshot": { "title": "Secure Software Development Practices for Generative AI and Dual-Use Foundation Models: An SSDF Community Profile", "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218A", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-nist-ssdf-ai-800218a" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "4d830eff87a69db3a941af404424fb285ab6dab9f5d4b2beb9841d4235c48c00", "snapshot": { "title": "Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence", "url": "https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/recommendation-ethics-artificial-intelligence?hub=1063", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-ak-unesco-ai-ethics" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "85160e65497f9b8d8694f3d7cf5ef45945ef006224f6c2a6a41a0bedd49b8620", "snapshot": { "title": "Adversarial Machine Learning: A Taxonomy and Terminology of Attacks and Mitigations", "url": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-2e2025", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-cr-nist-aml-100-2e2025" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-cu-unesco-genai-education", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "cebc6c774dc6d5693cd98f3d41790afdc5013273b90bb5733127435c5d88b8b1", "snapshot": { "title": "Guidance for Generative AI in Education and Research", "url": "https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000386693", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-cu-unesco-genai-education" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-cu-w3c-wcag22", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "30bd70251a20aa4e609b4890282d4253cbffb8a1a203b96cc745e6524e4c88b2", "snapshot": { "title": "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.2", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-cu-w3c-wcag22" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "3bff143e2e418d928ac157db7960cbc6c98de79f651527745aed0c915ebe3f98", "snapshot": { "title": "Global Report on Assistive Technology", "url": "https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240049451", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-cu-who-unicef-assistive-technology" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-pn-ietf-bpv7", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "4c045ad60ce6dfb1e8fe4842b707fa56c204d5445478a6104199ad2257092fe2", "snapshot": { "title": "RFC 9171: Bundle Protocol Version 7", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9171.html", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-pn-ietf-bpv7" } }, { "sourceId": "official-claim-source-src-pn-nasa-dtn", "sourceRecordType": "reference-source", "sourceFingerprint": "16146cd13fc9ded044ef317824254bd2623fd574400e0fe7484f63d25038544e", "snapshot": { "title": "Delay/Disruption Tolerant Networking", "url": "https://www.nasa.gov/communicating-with-missions/delay-disruption-tolerant-networking/", "checkedAt": null, "scopeNote": "Official subject link frozen with the reviewed record; it does not independently validate every profile conclusion.", "subjectRecordType": "claim-source", "subjectRecordId": "src-pn-nasa-dtn" } } ], "packetFingerprint": "533f9d7d5a5c0633ed9f3dfecd1bc1d0437d1bbf523ec9bf80b50c896d930237" }