New workplans: WP-0011 cross-border coupling, WP-0012 model matching and flipping, WP-0013 calibration (0011/0012 wait on 0013)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 14913@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: add7ef69-b901-4756-9a67-34cf1125d96f
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-10-13 15:58:20 +02:00
parent 15828606b4
commit ca7e1abd95
3 changed files with 317 additions and 0 deletions

View file

@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
---
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011
type: workplan
title: "Cross-border coupling: jurisdiction-local and global scenarios"
domain: communication
repo: assembly-economics
status: proposed
flavor: implementation
depends_on: [ASSEMBLY-WP-0013]
owner: claude-code
topic_slug: coulomb-social
created: "2026-10-13"
updated: "2026-10-13"
---
# Cross-border coupling: jurisdiction-local and global scenarios
GADM is a closed economy. The jurisdiction archetypes (WP-0009-T04,
`models/AdoptionBand.md` § 4) showed that this is the largest gap for both
owner hypotheses ("Europe lags", "Argentina may thrive"). A jurisdiction
with rights-first rules still runs on lineages, platforms and capital set
abroad.
Goal: two scenario modes on one model.
- **Jurisdiction-local in a defined context:** one jurisdiction is simulated
in full; the rest of the world is an exogenous context scenario (given
paths for foreign lineages, prices, capital, sentiment).
- **Global:** all jurisdictions are simulated together and exchange
cross-border flows at every time step.
Starts only after WP-0013 gives a calibrated, reality-aligned starting
point for each jurisdiction.
## Cross-border channels: inventory and evidence
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T01
status: todo
priority: high
```
List the channels through which jurisdictions affect each other, with
evidence and a candidate indicator for each. Candidates: lineage import
(models built under foreign rules: effective L, lin_open, m), platform and
membrane reach (foreign operators' discovery and attention extraction),
compute and capital flows (`aO` funded abroad), trade in organism output,
talent migration (H, F), regulatory spillover ("Brussels effect"), and
sentiment and media contagion (Σ). Choose the minimal set that can change
the readings in § 4.3. Write `models/CrossBorder.md`.
## Coupling structure in the model
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T02
status: todo
priority: high
```
Design how jurisdictions share state: a coupling matrix per channel
(weights from trade, platform market shares, lineage origin), and which
stocks become partly shared (lineage control, discovery channel, organism
capability frontier). Keep each jurisdiction's own levers. Decide the
numerical scheme: synchronous step, all jurisdictions read the previous step
of the others. The uncoupled case must reproduce the single-jurisdiction
model exactly.
## Multi-jurisdiction simulator
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T03
status: todo
priority: high
```
Implement `simulate_world(jurisdictions, coupling, T)` on top of `gadm04`.
Each jurisdiction has its own state, parameters and archetype. Tests:
coupling 0 equals independent runs; symmetric coupling of identical
jurisdictions equals one jurisdiction; conservation of shared quantities.
## Context scenarios for jurisdiction-local runs
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T04
status: todo
priority: medium
```
Define rest-of-world context scenarios (for example: "US-led concentrated
frontier", "open-lineage world", "fragmented blocs") as exogenous paths of
the coupled quantities, derived from global runs or set by hand. A local
run is one jurisdiction × one context × one band anchor.
## Global scenarios and hypothesis re-test
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T05
status: todo
priority: high
```
Run EU, US, AR (and a J4 reference bloc) together across B1–B4, with and
without the legitimacy loop. Re-test "Europe lags" and "Argentina may
thrive" with lineage import. Compare local-in-context and global results:
when does the context approximation fail? Update the break register.
## Checkpoint indicators for the coupling
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0011-T06
status: todo
priority: medium
```
Add indicators for the coupling weights to the catalog (lineage origin of
deployed models, cloud and platform market shares by jurisdiction, AI trade
and investment flows), so that the matrix can be updated from checkpoints
(WP-0010).

View file

@ -0,0 +1,109 @@
---
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012
type: workplan
title: "Model matching and regime flipping"
domain: communication
repo: assembly-economics
status: proposed
flavor: implementation
depends_on: [ASSEMBLY-WP-0013, ASSEMBLY-WP-0010]
owner: claude-code
topic_slug: coulomb-social
created: "2026-10-13"
updated: "2026-10-13"
---
# Model matching and regime flipping
Decide from gathered data which model (and which regime within a model)
fits each jurisdiction best, and use the best-fitting one for predictions and
simulations. When new measured or simulated data shows that another model or
regime fits better, record a **flipping event**: a signal that the regime a
jurisdiction or society operates under has changed significantly.
Candidates are combinations of model version (GADM-0.2 … 0.4, later the
coupled model of WP-0011), adoption anchor (B1–B4), archetype (J1–J4), and
loop structure (legitimacy loop on/off, self-enhancement). Starts after
WP-0013 provides the calibration machinery and a reality-aligned baseline.
## Candidate set and fit criterion
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T01
status: todo
priority: high
```
Define the candidate regimes and a fit criterion per jurisdiction: a
likelihood or scaled-error score over the checkpoint indicators, with
indicator noise and proxy uncertainty (catalog caveat: no indicator equals
a model quantity). Penalize complexity (for example an information
criterion), so that a richer model wins only when the data demands it.
Write `research/ModelMatching.md`.
## Matching engine
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T02
status: todo
priority: high
```
Implement `matching.py`: for each jurisdiction, fit each candidate to the
checkpoint series (using the WP-0013 calibration routine), score it, and
produce a ranked table with weights (for example Akaike or Bayesian model
weights). Output: `results/matching.md` and a machine-readable record per
checkpoint.
## Flipping events: definition and detection
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T03
status: todo
priority: high
```
Define a flipping event: the best-fitting regime changes **and** the
evidence for the change exceeds a threshold that persists over at least two
checkpoints, so that noise does not flip. Distinguish measured flips (from
observed data) and simulated flips (a run crosses into another regime's
basin, for example the B4 boom-bust of BR-005). Record each event in a
flip register (`research/FlipRegister.md`), linked to the break register.
## Predictions from the matched model
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T04
status: todo
priority: medium
```
Use the best-fitting regime, or a weighted ensemble, for the prediction
register (`checkpoints/predictions.md`). Each prediction states which
regime produced it. After a flip, new predictions use the new regime; old
predictions remain and are scored as they were made.
## Checkpoint integration
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T05
status: todo
priority: medium
```
Run matching at every full checkpoint (and optionally at light ones), and
report the current regime per jurisdiction and any flip candidates in the
checkpoint record. Coordinate the runner change with WP-0010.
## Test on synthetic data
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0012-T06
status: todo
priority: high
```
Before trusting real flips: generate synthetic indicator series from a known
regime that switches at a known time, add realistic noise and gaps, and
check that matching recovers the regime and detects the flip with an
acceptable delay and false-alarm rate.

View file

@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
---
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013
type: workplan
title: "Calibration of GADM to measured data"
domain: communication
repo: assembly-economics
status: ready
flavor: implementation
depends_on: [ASSEMBLY-WP-0009, ASSEMBLY-WP-0010]
owner: claude-code
topic_slug: coulomb-social
created: "2026-10-13"
updated: "2026-10-13"
---
# Calibration of GADM to measured data
Tune model parameters and initial states to the measured checkpoint data, so
that scenarios start from a reasonably reality-aligned state per
jurisdiction. WP-0011 (cross-border coupling) and WP-0012 (model matching
and flipping) start only after this.
Grounding in WP-0008 fixed some parameters from the literature. This
workplan fits the remaining ones to observed levels and trends.
## Calibration targets from checkpoint data
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013-T01
status: todo
priority: high
```
Translate catalog indicators (`checkpoints/IndicatorCatalog.md`) into model
targets per jurisdiction: an observation operator from the raw indicator to
the normalized model quantity (for example AI firm-use share → K_Ω), with
an uncertainty range that reflects proxy quality. Start with the stocks
that have data: K_Ω (L1, L2), investment (L5), labour share (F1), attention
(F4), domination (F2), sentiment (L6), ecology (E1). Write
`models/Calibration.md` and `simulations/gadm02/calibration_targets.json`.
## Calibration routine
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013-T02
status: todo
priority: high
```
Implement `calibrate_data.py`: choose free parameters (those that GSA
identifies as influential and grounding did not fix), fit them to the
targets with a bounded, derivative-free optimizer (standard library only,
for example Nelder–Mead or a coarse grid followed by local search), and
report fit, residuals and identifiability (which parameters the data does
not constrain).
## Per-jurisdiction starting states
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013-T03
status: todo
priority: high
```
Fit initial states and archetype levers for US, EU, DE and AR from the
checkpoint 0 data. Where data is missing (AR adoption, sentiment), keep the
prior and widen the uncertainty instead of guessing.
## Re-run readings from the calibrated start
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013-T04
status: todo
priority: medium
```
Re-run the band probe, legitimacy loop and jurisdiction archetypes from the
calibrated starting states. Record which readings survive calibration and
which change (break register).
## Re-calibration at checkpoints
```task
id: ASSEMBLY-WP-0013-T05
status: todo
priority: low
```
Document how calibration is repeated when new checkpoint data arrives, and
hand the routine to WP-0012 for model matching.