assembly-economics/models/GADM-CLD.md
tegwick 0e372398bf Implement ASSEMBLY-WP-0004: GADM-0.2 model, simulation, scenarios, sensitivity
- models/GADM-CLD.md: causal-loop diagram, loops, 49 signed links
- models/GADM-0.2.md: organism extensions (K split, attention headroom,
  selection channel O, membrane/lineage levers, participation claims),
  equations, findings
- simulations/gadm02: stdlib simulation, scenario runner, OAT sensitivity,
  unit tests; results committed
- scenarios/: six GADM-0.1 regimes + baseline + two organism-axis variants
- metrics/MetricsCatalog.md, models/GADM-0.3-Candidates.md,
  references/LiteratureComparison.md
- ASSEMBLY-WP-0005 (proposed, residual): GADM-0.3

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

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1494246@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: caf6de6f-f9e4-47ce-a584-49baa271fa4b
2026-10-12 00:43:53 +02:00

7.8 KiB
Raw Blame History

GADM Causal Structure — Causal-Loop Diagram and Link Table

Status: v0.1 for GADM-0.1 plus the GADM-0.2 additions, exploratory.

1. Causal-loop diagram

Solid arrows are GADM-0.1. Dotted arrows are the GADM-0.2 organism additions. Edge labels give the polarity: + means same direction, − means opposite direction.

flowchart LR
  H[H Human capability] -->|+| V
  X[X Assembly commons] -->|+| V
  F[F Risk capacity] -->|+| V
  G[G Effective agency] -->|+| V
  N[N Diversity & composability] -->|+| V
  Q[Q Epistemic capacity] -->|+| V
  P[P Domination] -->|−| V
  V((V Experimentation)) -->|+| VS((V_sel Selected))
  SIG((σ Selection quality)) -->|+| VS
  VS -->|+ via ρ| X
  VS -->|+| K[K Productive capacity]
  K -->|+| Y((Y* Output))
  E[E Ecological headroom] -->|+| Y
  Y -->|+| I((I Claims))
  I -->|+| D((D Demand))
  S[S Social cohesion] -->|+| D
  D -->|+| SIG
  I -->|+ existence security| G
  F -->|+ restartability| G
  P -->|−| G
  VS -->|+ private return| P
  P -->|+ network effects| P
  Q -->|− checks| P
  X -->|− interoperability| P
  K -->|− throughput| E
  G -->|+| S
  P -->|−| S
  X -->|+| H
  S -->|+| H
  X -->|+| Q
  P -->|−| Q
  V -->|− if V > Q| Q
  V -->|+ entry| N
  P -->|−| N
  X -->|+ standards| N

  Ko[K_Ω Organism capability] -.->|+| V
  Ko -.->|+ learning with use| Ko
  VS -.->|+| Ko
  Ko -.->|+ membrane & lineage control| P
  Ko -.->|− deskilling| H
  Ko -.->|− lock-in| G
  Ko -.->|− monoculture| N
  Ko -.->|− labor share| I
  Ko -.->|− compute draw| E
  Ko -.->|− extraction| A[A Attention headroom]
  A -.->|+ adoption| SIG
  A -.->|+| H
  A -.->|+| S
  I -.->|+ recovery| A

2. Loops

ID Type Path Reading
R1 reinforcing X → V → V_sel → X Generative reuse. Commons enable experiments, and selected experiments become commons. Strength depends on ρ.
R2 reinforcing V_sel → K → Y* → I → D → σ → V_sel Demand-backed growth. Works only while claims stay broad.
R3 reinforcing V_sel → P (private return) → P (network effects) Success becomes control (GADM-0.1 § 13). Path closure when unchecked.
R4 reinforcing Y* → I → G → V → V_sel → K → Y* Agency-backed growth. Existence security widens who can attempt.
R5 reinforcing G → S → D → σ → V_sel → K → Y* → I → G Cohesion. Legitimate participation sustains demand and selection.
R6 reinforcing X → Q → V → V_sel → X Epistemic commons. Open evidence improves the experiments that feed the commons.
R7 (0.2) reinforcing K_Ω → K_Ω (learning with use) Organism learning. Organisms improve fastest where they are used most.
R8 (0.2) reinforcing K_Ω → P → G, S → D → V_sel → K_Ω Lineage concentration. Combined with R7, this is the natural-monopoly loop of the mapping note's open question 1.
B1 balancing P → V → V_sel → P (private return) Domination throttles its own source. High P shrinks experimentation, which slows the success that feeds P. Weak relative to R3.
B2 balancing K → E → Y* → I → D → V_sel → K Ecological limit. Throughput erodes headroom and caps output.
B3 balancing V → Q → V (when V > Q) Epistemic brake. Experimentation that outruns model correction degrades Q, which slows V (GADM-0.1 § 15).
B4 balancing Q → P → Q (checks) Accountability. Epistemic capacity checks domination, and domination captures information. In the model, a reinforcing pair in disguise: whichever wins compounds.
B5 (0.2) balancing K_Ω → A → σ → V_sel → K_Ω Attention limit. Extraction depletes the attention that adoption and selection need.
B6 (0.2) balancing K_Ω → I (labor share) → D → V_sel → K_Ω Demand erosion. Automation without broad claims undermines its own demand.

Conf. is confidence in the sign: H (stated in GADM-0.1 or definitional), M (plausible, inferred from GADM text), L (contested). Src. is the source section in GADM-0.1, or the mapping note (MN).

# Source Target Sign Mechanism Conf. Src.
1 H V + capability to attempt H § 5
2 X V + reusable components H § 5
3 F V + risk-bearing capacity H § 5
4 G V + effective freedom to attempt H § 5
5 N V + recombination potential H § 5
6 Q V + model quality H § 5
7 P V − gatekeeping H § 5
8 V V_sel + definitional H § 6
9 σ V_sel + definitional H § 6
10 V_sel X + preservation via ρ H § 7
11 P X − enclosure L_X M § 7
12 V_sel K + commercial conversion H § 8
13 K Y* + definitional H § 8
14 E Y* + ecological constraint f(E) H § 8
15 Y* I + claims on output H § 9
16 I D + purchasing power H § 10
17 S D + social confidence H § 10
18 D σ (market) + adoption M § 19
19 I G + existence security H § 12
20 F G + restartability M § 12
21 P G − domination term H § 12
22 V_sel P + private return → control H § 13
23 P P + network effects, capture H § 13
24 Q P − checks (audit, evidence) M § 13
25 X P − interoperability M § 13
26 K E − physical throughput H § 14
27 G S + agency, future opportunity H § 17
28 P S − domination, lack of voice H § 17
29 X H + education, transfer T_g M §§ 11, 18
30 S H + care, participation M § 11
31 X Q + open evidence, research infrastructure M § 15
32 P Q − information capture H § 15
33 V Q − (if V > Q) experimentation outruns correction L § 15
34 V N + entry M § 16
35 P N − monoculture, lock-in H § 16
36 X N + open standards M § 16
37 K_Ω V + cheap experiments, gated by Q M MN § 3.1
38 K_Ω K_Ω + learning with use M MN § 1
39 K_Ω P + membrane control, lineage concentration (moderated by m, L) M MN § 3.5
40 K_Ω H − deskilling (moderated by m) L MN § 2
41 K_Ω G ± access (+, with m) vs. lock-in (−, without m) L MN § 2
42 K_Ω N − monoculture (moderated by L) M MN § 2
43 K_Ω I (labor share) − automation H MN § 3.4
44 K_Ω E − compute draw M MN § 4
45 K_Ω A − extraction (moderated by x_att) M MN § 4
46 K_Ω Q ± audit/research (+, with expl) vs. opacity (−) L MN § 2
47 A σ (market) + adoption needs attention M MN § 4
48 A H, S + self-directed development, participation M MN § 4
49 I A + economic security frees attention L new
  • #33. GADM-0.1 states the damage hypothesis qualitatively. GADM-0.2 implements it as a degradation of Q proportional to max(0, V − Q). The threshold form is a modeling choice.
  • #40, #41, #46. The sign depends on institutional levers. GADM-0.2 makes this explicit: membrane control m and explainability expl switch the dominant sign.
  • #49. Not in either source. Introduced so that precarity reduces attention headroom. Needs empirical grounding (WS-14).