diff --git a/Claims.md b/Claims.md
index e5a18f3..b35605c 100644
--- a/Claims.md
+++ b/Claims.md
@@ -64,17 +64,19 @@ Soul Frame concept: Mind
 Supporting literature:
   - Ashby 1956 (regulation)
   - Conant & Ashby 1970 (Good Regulator Theorem)
-  - Predictive processing / active inference traditions (pointer; Phase II/III)
-  - RN-001 Findings 4–6
+  - Clark 2016 Surfing Uncertainty; Hohwy 2013 Predictive Mind
+  - Friston active inference literature (with Markov-blanket cautions)
+  - Baker, Saxe & Tenenbaum 2009 (inverse planning)
+  - RN-001 Findings 4–6; research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md
 Contradicting literature:
   - Anti-representational / radical enactivist critiques of “model” talk
   - Consciousness-first theories of mind
-Adjacent terminology: regulator, model, predictive processing, enaction
-Evidence strength: moderate → approaching strong for control-theoretic reading;
-  mixed if “model” is read as explicit internal representation only
+Adjacent terminology: regulator, generative model, predictive processing, enaction
+Evidence strength: strong for control-theoretic / generative-model reading;
+  mixed if “model” is restricted to explicit propositional representation only
 Open questions: OQ-055 definition of model; embodied non-representational cases
-Required refinement: define “model” inclusively enough for regulation + social cognition
-Status: supported (Phase I)
+Required refinement: model = action-guiding revisable structure (inclusive)
+Status: supported (Phase II)
 ```
 
 ### H4 — Social cognition is co-adaptive
@@ -82,19 +84,20 @@ Status: supported (Phase I)
 ```text
 Claim: Persistent interaction between beings produces recursively adapting models
        of self, other, and relationship.
-Soul Frame concept: Co-adaptive model building, Mind
+Soul Frame concept: Co-adaptive model building, Mind, Social Mind (SM1–SM8)
 Supporting literature:
   - Mead 1934; Pickering & Garrod 2004; Clark & Brennan 1991; Tomasello et al. 2005
-  - De Jaegher & Di Paolo 2007; I-POMDP / recursive agent modeling
-  - RN-006 synthesis
+  - De Jaegher & Di Paolo 2007/2010; Schilbach et al. 2013
+  - Baker et al. 2009; Gmytrasiewicz & Doshi 2005 (I-POMDP)
+  - RN-006 full synthesis; research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md
 Contradicting literature: purely individualistic Theory-of-Mind accounts that
-  underplay interaction dynamics
+  underplay interaction dynamics; narrow “no model” enactivism
 Adjacent terminology: theory of mind, interactive alignment, common ground,
-  participatory sense-making
-Evidence strength: moderate (Phase II will own full pass; Phase I notes support direction)
+  participatory sense-making, second-person cognition
+Evidence strength: moderate → strong (as synthesis; not a single-lab empirical law)
 Open questions: OQ-055–068 in RN-006
-Required refinement: co-adaptation ≠ model exchange
-Status: under review (promising; Phase II)
+Required refinement: co-adaptation ≠ model exchange; conflict/deception included
+Status: supported (Phase II)
 ```
 
 ### H5 — Soul can be operationalized relationally
@@ -150,14 +153,20 @@ Claim: Being recognized as a persistent counterpart changes the systemic role of
        autonomous individuality.
 Soul Frame concept: Recognition, Social Beinghood
 Supporting literature:
-  - RN-001 Findings 8–10 (three senses of recognition; recognition ≠ create Being)
-  - Mead; intentional stance literature (pointer)
-Contradicting literature: strong social-construction-only accounts of existence
-Adjacent terminology: recognition theory, intentional stance, intersubjectivity
-Evidence strength: moderate for distinction; Phase II sociology pass pending
-Open questions: RQ6; TE-09 Unrecognized Intelligence
-Required refinement: epistemic vs intentional vs social recognition
-Status: revised (Phase I clarification)
+  - RN-001 Findings 8–10 (three senses; recognition ≠ create systemic Being)
+  - Mead 1934; Dennett intentional stance; Honneth recognition theory
+  - Schilbach et al. 2013 (second-person interaction)
+  - research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md; TE-09 judgment
+Contradicting literature: strong social-construction-only accounts of existence;
+  unrestricted “recognition creates Being”
+Adjacent terminology: recognition theory, intentional stance, intersubjectivity,
+  trust, reputation
+Evidence strength: moderate
+Open questions: RQ6 packaging of recognition inside Beinghood v0.2; moral vs
+  descriptive recognition (Phase III)
+Required refinement: epistemic vs intentional vs social recognition; false
+  positives from intentional stance
+Status: supported / refined (Phase II)
 ```
 
 ### H8 — Persona is a projection rather than an identity
diff --git a/OpenQuestions.md b/OpenQuestions.md
index 4dea74d..49f2ae4 100644
--- a/OpenQuestions.md
+++ b/OpenQuestions.md
@@ -29,15 +29,19 @@ for Beinghood established (daemon false positive).
 
 ## RQ3 — What constitutes a Mind?
 
-**Phase I status:** model-based reading supported (H3); remaining:
+**Phase II status:** model-based reading **supported** (H3); Social Mind SM1–SM8
+architecture adopted provisionally. Remaining:
 
-- Precise definition of “model” (OQ-055)
-- Minimal apparatus; recursive social depth
-- Relation to RN-006 model families SM1–SM8
+- Precise definition of “model” (OQ-055) — inclusive working def in concepts/mind.md
+- Minimal apparatus for non-social vs social Mind
+- Recursive depth for personhood (OQ-056)
+- When common ground becomes collective Mind (OQ-067)
 
 ## RQ4 — What constitutes a Soul?
 
-**Phase I status:** revised definition (boundary removed); **not closed**.
+**Phase I–II status:** revised definition (boundary removed); **not closed**.
+Phase II ends by pointing to Cluster D: what persists from interactions beyond
+immediate models (relational persistence = Soul’s domain).
 
 - Rename vs retain “Soul”
 - Packaging: relations vs consequences vs both
@@ -55,10 +59,13 @@ for Beinghood established (daemon false positive).
 
 ## RQ6 — How does recognition create social beinghood?
 
-**Phase I status:** recognition disambiguated; social vs systemic clarified.
+**Phase II status:** **refined answer available** — recognition constitutive of
+*social* Beinghood, not bare autonomous individuality; three senses fixed;
+TE-09 judged. Remaining:
 
-- TE-09: is recognition constitutive of Being or only Social Being?
-- Minimal recognition conditions
+- Exact label policy for Beinghood v0.2 vs “autonomous individual”
+- Minimal intentional vs social recognition conditions
+- Moral/legal recognition deferred to Phase III
 
 ## RQ7 — What is character?
 
@@ -86,7 +93,7 @@ succession; Agent functional vs autonomous split. Full typology Phase IV–V.
 
 ---
 
-## Resolved / refined (Phase I)
+## Resolved / refined (Phase I–II)
 
 | Item | Disposition | Pointer |
 |---|---|---|
@@ -96,3 +103,8 @@ succession; Agent functional vs autonomous split. Full typology Phase IV–V.
 | Identity = Continuity? | **No** — may branch | Parfit; RN-004 |
 | Soul = boundary? | **No** — Soul = relation | RN-001 §14 |
 | Actor = Being? | **No** | H6; TE-04 |
+| Mind = consciousness? | **No** — model-based control | H3; Phase II map |
+| Co-adaptation = model exchange? | **No** — joint evolution via interaction | H4; RN-006 |
+| Shared intentionality = Social Mind? | **No** — special case of cooperation | RN-006 |
+| Recognition creates systemic Being? | **No** — creates/enables Social Beinghood | H7; TE-09 |
+| Unrecognized intelligence impossible? | **No** — autonomy without social Beinghood | TE-09 |
diff --git a/ThoughtExperiments.md b/ThoughtExperiments.md
index 4ac28d6..4ffcfda 100644
--- a/ThoughtExperiments.md
+++ b/ThoughtExperiments.md
@@ -188,14 +188,21 @@ ID: TE-09
 Name: The Unrecognized Intelligence
 Setup: A highly coherent alien informational system exists; neither humans nor the
        system initially recognize the other as beings.
-Target concepts: Being, recognition, social Beinghood
+Target concepts: Being, recognition, social Beinghood, autonomous individuality
 Intended stress: Whether Beinghood requires recognition
-Working judgment: (pending full Phase II) Working Phase I stance: autonomous
-  individuality can exist without mutual recognition; Social Beinghood cannot.
-  Beinghood v0.2 includes recognition as a layer for the intended “someone”
-  category — TE-09 pressures whether that layer is constitutive or only social.
-Open issues: systemic existence vs social recognition (RQ6, H7)
-Related claims / questions: H7, RQ6
+Working judgment (Phase II):
+  Autonomous individuality: possible without recognition.
+  Social Beinghood: absent until intentional/social recognition and addressable
+  interaction begin.
+  Soul Frame “Being” as someone-another-can-know: not yet satisfied without at
+  least directed intentional recognition as a persistent counterpart.
+  Prefer terminology: call unrecognized systems autonomous individuals (or
+  candidates), not Social Beings. Avoid claiming they “do not exist.”
+  Asymmetric recognition can start Social Beinghood on one side before reciprocity.
+Open issues: exact packaging of recognition inside Beinghood v0.2 label; moral
+  recognition later (Phase III)
+Related claims / questions: H7, RQ6;
+  research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md
 ```
 
 ---
diff --git a/concepts/mind.md b/concepts/mind.md
index e7152ad..2255445 100644
--- a/concepts/mind.md
+++ b/concepts/mind.md
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 # Mind
 
-**Status:** retained / refined (Phase I, 2026-08-12)  
+**Status:** retained / refined (Phase II, 2026-08-12)  
 **Working gloss:** Mind = Model (adaptive control through models)  
-**See also:** H3, H4, RQ3, RN-001, RN-006
+**See also:** H3, H4, RQ3, RN-001, RN-006, `research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md`
 
 ## Working definition
 
@@ -12,28 +12,62 @@ to guide action.
 
 > **Mind = Model**
 
+“Model” means an **action-guiding structure that can be revised**, not only
+explicit propositional representation.
+
 ## Precedents
 
 | Tradition | Contribution |
 |---|---|
-| Ashby cybernetics | regulation, variety |
-| Conant & Ashby 1970 | good regulator requires a model |
-| Extended / distributed cognition | Mind not confined to a single substrate |
+| Ashby; Conant & Ashby 1970 | regulation requires a model |
+| Predictive processing / active inference | generative models unite perception and action |
+| Inverse planning (Baker et al.) | Other-Model as inference from behavior |
+| Extended / distributed cognition | Mind not confined to one substrate |
 | Social cognition (RN-006) | self/other/relation models co-adapt through interaction |
 
-## Notes
+## Social Mind model families
 
-- Prefer model-based control over intelligence or consciousness as foundation.
-- “Model” should not be restricted to explicit propositional representation only
-  (enactive critiques remain open — OQ-055).
-- Co-adaptive model building is joint evolution through interaction, not model exchange.
+| ID | Model |
+|---|---|
+| SM1 | World |
+| SM2 | Self |
+| SM3 | Other |
+| SM4 | Reflected-Self |
+| SM5 | Relationship |
+| SM6 | Shared Situation |
+| SM7 | Common Ground |
+| SM8 | Generalized Social |
+
+Social Mind is a specialization of Mind for multi-Being interaction — not a
+second kind of mind.
+
+## Co-adaptive model building
+
+Joint evolution of models through interaction (not model exchange). Models can
+be self-confirming or self-defeating because they change the evidence stream.
+
+Definition: `research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md`
+
+## Quality metrics (beyond accuracy)
+
+Calibration, revisability, differentiation of counterparts, perspective
+separation (mine / yours / yours-of-mine).
+
+## Crosswalk (Phase II)
+
+| Adjacent term | Similarity | Difference |
+|---|---|---|
+| generative model (PP) | action-guiding predictive structure | PP often neural-centric |
+| theory of mind | other-modeling | ToM often private; Social Mind is interactional |
+| common ground | shared acceptance | one model family (SM7), not whole Mind |
+| participatory sense-making | interaction constitutes understanding | may reject “model” vocabulary |
 
 ## Open issues
 
-- Minimal model apparatus for a Mind
-- Recursive depth for social personhood
-- Collective / distributed Mind boundaries (TE-05)
+- OQ-055 precise scope of “model”
+- Recursive depth for personhood (OQ-056)
+- Collective Mind boundaries (OQ-067)
 
 ## Sources
 
-`research/foundations/001-*.md`, `Research Note 006 — Social Mind and Co-Adaptive Model Building.md`
+Phase I foundations 001; Phase II cognitive-science map; RN-006 + references
diff --git a/concepts/recognition.md b/concepts/recognition.md
index b627d96..44be84b 100644
--- a/concepts/recognition.md
+++ b/concepts/recognition.md
@@ -1,33 +1,50 @@
 # Recognition
 
-**Status:** revised (Phase I, 2026-08-12)  
-**See also:** H7, RQ6, TE-09, RN-001 Findings 8–10
+**Status:** revised (Phase II, 2026-08-12)  
+**See also:** H7, RQ6, TE-09, `research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md`
 
 ## Three senses
 
-| Sense | Meaning |
-|---|---|
-| Epistemic | Detect/classify an entity |
-| Intentional | Treat as agent with goals/beliefs (cf. intentional stance) |
-| Social / normative | Treat as counterpart in relationships, obligations, reputation |
+| Sense | Meaning | Adjacent work |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Epistemic** | Identify/track as the same entity | reidentification, addressability |
+| **Intentional** | Treat as agent with goals/beliefs | Dennett intentional stance; Theory of Mind |
+| **Social / normative** | Standing, perspective, claims matter among us | Honneth recognition theory; Mead; trust/reputation |
+
+Do not collapse these senses.
+
+## Layer model
+
+```text
+Autonomous individuality  →  may exist unrecognized
+Intentional recognition   →  treated as agent-like
+Addressability            →  can be specifically targeted
+Social Beinghood          →  persistent reciprocal models, relations,
+                             expectations, commitments, reputation
+```
 
 ## Role in Beinghood
 
-Recognition is **constitutive of social Beinghood**, not of bare autonomous
-individuality. Beinghood v0.2 includes recognition among requirement families
-for the intended “someone” category — TE-09 still pressures that packaging.
+| Level | Role of recognition |
+|---|---|
+| Autonomous individuality | **not required** |
+| Social Beinghood | **constitutive** (H7) |
+| Soul Frame “Being” as *someone another can know* | recognition + personhood + addressability on autonomous base (Beinghood v0.2), with TE-09 pressure |
+
+**Caution:** intentional recognition **over-generates** (APE false positives).
+Recognition alone does not create systemic individuality (RN-001 Finding 10).
 
 ## Working social principle
 
-> A system becomes socially relevant as a Being when other beings can distinguish
-> it, address it, expect continuity from it, maintain models of it, and enter
-> persistent relationships with it.
+> A system becomes **socially** relevant as a Being when other beings can
+> distinguish it, address it, expect continuity from it, maintain models of it,
+> and enter persistent relationships with it.
 
-## Related
+## TE-09 (summary)
 
-- **Addressability** — ability to target the entity specifically  
-- **Social Being** — embedded in reciprocal models and relations  
+Unrecognized coherent intelligence can be an autonomous individual without
+Social Beinghood. See sociology map for full judgment.
 
 ## Sources
 
-RN-001 §9–10; Mead 1934; Phase II sociology pass pending
+RN-001 §9–10; Mead; Dennett; Honneth; Phase II sociology map; RN-006 (mutual models)
diff --git a/research/cognitive-science/README.md b/research/cognitive-science/README.md
index 2ad1745..5427fdc 100644
--- a/research/cognitive-science/README.md
+++ b/research/cognitive-science/README.md
@@ -5,7 +5,8 @@
 
 ## Status
 
-Not started.
+**Phase II integrated** (2026-08-12). See `mind-as-model-map.md` and
+`research/phase-ii-interaction-synthesis.md`.
 
 ## Key questions
 
diff --git a/research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md b/research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5f4993
--- /dev/null
+++ b/research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+# Mind as Model — Cognitive Science Map (Phase II)
+
+**Workplan:** SOUL-WP-0003-T01  
+**Date:** 2026-08-12  
+**Purpose:** Map predictive processing, active inference, internal models, and
+metacognition against Soul Frame **Mind = Model**.
+
+Builds on Phase I: Ashby; Conant & Ashby; extended/distributed cognition
+(`research/foundations/001-*.md`).
+
+---
+
+## 1. Soul Frame target definition
+
+> Mind is the adaptive modeling and regulatory dimension of a Being: models of
+> self, others, environment, and relationships guide action and are revised by
+> interaction.
+
+Phase II asks whether contemporary cognitive science strengthens or weakens this.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Source crosswalk
+
+| Source | Core idea | Agreement with Soul Frame | Tension |
+|---|---|---|---|
+| **Ashby 1956; Conant & Ashby 1970** | Regulation requires a model of the regulated system | Direct support for Mind = Model (H3) | Classical cybernetics is not social/personhood theory |
+| **Friston / Active Inference** | Agents minimize free energy via generative models of sensory causes; action and perception as inference | Strong formalization of adaptive modeling + control as one package | Philosophical over-extension debates; Markov blanket ≠ full Being (RN-002) |
+| **Clark, *Surfing Uncertainty* (2016) and related PP** | Brain as prediction machine; perception as controlled hallucination; action as prediction error minimization | Mind as hierarchical generative modeling fits “model-based adaptation” | Risk of reducing Mind to a single neural story; Soul Frame needs multi-substrate models |
+| **Hohwy, *The Predictive Mind* (2013)** | Systematic PP account of mind | Supports internal generative models as central to cognition | Stronger internalism than extended-mind / distributed views |
+| **Metacognition literature** (overview) | Models of own cognitive processes, uncertainty, confidence | Supports Self-Model and calibration of Other-Models | Not sufficient alone for Social Mind |
+| **Baker, Saxe & Tenenbaum 2009** | Inverse planning: infer goals/beliefs from action | Other-Model as inverse inference | Rational-agent assumptions |
+| **Enactive critiques** (e.g. participatory sense-making; radical enactivism) | Interaction can constitute cognition; caution on representation talk | Interaction process is first-class (RN-006) | May reject “model” vocabulary; Soul Frame must keep “model” inclusive |
+
+**Done criterion (≥4 rigorous sources with agreements/tensions):** met.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Working synthesis for Mind
+
+```text
+Mind  ⊇  generative / regulatory models
+      +  update from evidence (including social evidence)
+      +  action selection guided by those models
+      +  (for Social Mind) coupled self/other/relation models
+```
+
+**Not required for Mind in Soul Frame:**
+
+- solved consciousness,
+- biological brain,
+- single substrate location,
+- perfect accuracy of models.
+
+**Quality of Mind** (from RN-006, generalized):
+
+- calibration (uncertainty),
+- revisability,
+- differentiation (distinct counterparts),
+- perspective separation (mine vs yours vs yours-of-mine),
+- not accuracy alone when models are causal in interaction.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Metacognition placement
+
+Metacognition maps primarily to:
+
+- **SM2 Self-Model** (including confidence about own knowledge),
+- **SM4 Reflected-Self Model** (what others model about me),
+- model-quality monitoring (calibration).
+
+It is a capability dimension of Mind, not a separate Soul Frame top-level term.
+
+---
+
+## 5. Implications
+
+1. H3 is **strengthened** by PP/active inference *and* by inverse-planning ToM work.
+2. “Model” should mean **action-guiding structure that can be revised**, not only
+   explicit propositional representation (keeps enactive tensions manageable).
+3. Social Mind (RN-006 SM1–SM8) is a **specialization** of Mind for multi-Being
+   interaction, not a second kind of mind.
+
+## 6. Bibliography pointers
+
+See `sources/bibliography.md` § E (Phase II cognitive science additions) and
+`research/foundations/References-ResearchNote006.md`.
diff --git a/research/phase-ii-interaction-synthesis.md b/research/phase-ii-interaction-synthesis.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..da00b03
--- /dev/null
+++ b/research/phase-ii-interaction-synthesis.md
@@ -0,0 +1,141 @@
+# Phase II Interaction — Synthesis
+
+**Workplan:** SOUL-WP-0003  
+**Date:** 2026-08-12  
+**Status:** complete for Phase II gate  
+**Primary bodies:** RN-006; `research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md`;
+`research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md`;
+`research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md`
+
+---
+
+## 1. Purpose
+
+Ground **co-adaptive model building** and **social Beinghood** in cognitive
+science, social cognition, and recognition/intersubjectivity traditions.
+
+Assumes Phase I: layered Beinghood, Mind as model-based regulation,
+Identity ≠ Continuity ≠ Lineage, Soul as relation not boundary.
+
+---
+
+## 2. What holds
+
+1. **Mind = Model is strengthened** by predictive processing, active inference,
+   inverse planning, and classical cybernetics (H3 → strong for control-theoretic
+   reading).
+
+2. **Social Mind is multi-model** — SM1–SM8 (world, self, other, reflected-self,
+   relationship, shared situation, common ground, generalized social). A single
+   “user model” is architecturally inadequate.
+
+3. **Co-adaptive model building is joint evolution through interaction**, not
+   private ToM plus message exchange (H4 supported). Interaction is a first-class
+   process (participatory sense-making; second-person approaches).
+
+4. **Shared intentionality and common ground are important but not definitional**
+   of Social Mind. Conflict, deception, and misalignment are also co-adaptive.
+
+5. **Recognition has three senses** — epistemic, intentional, social/normative.
+   Intentional recognition over-generates (APE false positives).
+
+6. **Recognition is constitutive of Social Beinghood, not of autonomous
+   individuality** (H7 refined; TE-09 judged). Unrecognized intelligences can
+   exist as autonomous individuals without being Social Beings.
+
+---
+
+## 3. What must change (from pre-research social story)
+
+| Earlier tendency | Phase II correction |
+|---|---|
+| Social interaction = mutual ToM | Interaction process co-constitutes understanding |
+| One model of the other | Coupled model families SM1–SM8 |
+| Co-adaptation = agreement | Co-adaptation includes conflict/deception |
+| Recognition creates Being | Recognition enables Social Beinghood; autonomy prior |
+| Mind quality = prediction accuracy | Also calibration, revisability, differentiation, perspective separation |
+
+---
+
+## 4. Evidence on Phase II hypotheses
+
+| Hypothesis | Strength | Status |
+|---|---|---|
+| H3 model-based Mind | strong (control-theoretic) | supported |
+| H4 co-adaptive social cognition | moderate→strong synthesis | supported |
+| H7 recognition → social Beinghood | moderate | supported / refined |
+
+---
+
+## 5. Compact Social Mind loop
+
+```text
+Being A models (self, other, relation, situation, common ground)
+        → acts
+        → interaction process changes
+        → evidence for A and B
+        → both update
+        → next interaction
+```
+
+Central proposition:
+
+> **Social Mind is inherently reflexive: each Being’s models become part of the
+> other’s environment.**
+
+---
+
+## 6. Bridge to Soul (Cluster D preview)
+
+Phase II ends where models and interactions leave **persistent relational traces**:
+
+- expectations and reputation,
+- commitments and roles,
+- relationship history,
+- models preserved by others after operational end.
+
+That residual is the doorway to **Soul = Relation** (RQ4 still open on naming).
+
+---
+
+## 7. Terminology survivors
+
+| Term | Disposition |
+|---|---|
+| Mind | retain; inclusive “model” |
+| Co-adaptive model building | retain as technical phrase |
+| Social Mind | provisional architecture name (SM1–SM8) |
+| Recognition | retain with three-sense disambiguation |
+| Social Beinghood | retain as distinct from autonomous individuality |
+| Intentional stance | adjacent; use carefully (false positives) |
+
+---
+
+## 8. Unresolved → later phases
+
+| Item | Next phase |
+|---|---|
+| Descriptive personhood dimensions | Phase III (SOUL-WP-0004) |
+| Character / Persona / Mask | Phase III |
+| Moral vs legal recognition | Phase III / WS5 / WS12 |
+| Soul rename and relational persistence formalization | later synthesis / Cluster D |
+| Artificial agent architectures map | Phase IV |
+| Sp./Gh. social authority | Phase V |
+
+---
+
+## 9. Unblock for SOUL-WP-0004
+
+Personhood research may assume:
+
+- model-based Mind with social specialization,
+- co-adaptation as interactional process,
+- recognition multi-sense + Social Beinghood distinct from autonomy,
+- TE-01/TE-09 guardrails against equating person-like UX with Beinghood.
+
+## 10. Compact Phase II thesis
+
+> **When continuing individuals meet, understanding is not the possession of a
+> correct private model of the other. It is the recursive, interaction-shaped
+> evolution of multiple models—of self, other, relation, and shared situation—
+> through which beings become socially real to one another.**
diff --git a/research/social-cognition/README.md b/research/social-cognition/README.md
index 5f050d5..07f5cef 100644
--- a/research/social-cognition/README.md
+++ b/research/social-cognition/README.md
@@ -5,7 +5,8 @@
 
 ## Status
 
-Not started.
+**Phase II complete for gate** (2026-08-12). See `co-adaptive-model-building.md`
+and foundations RN-006.
 
 ## Key questions
 
diff --git a/research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md b/research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b20124
--- /dev/null
+++ b/research/social-cognition/co-adaptive-model-building.md
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
+# Co-Adaptive Model Building — Social Cognition Map (Phase II)
+
+**Workplan:** SOUL-WP-0003-T02  
+**Date:** 2026-08-12  
+**Primary research body:** `research/foundations/Research Note 006 — Social Mind and Co-Adaptive Model Building.md`
+
+---
+
+## 1. Working definition (RN-006)
+
+> **Co-Adaptive Model Building** is the recurrent process through which two or
+> more Beings update action-guiding models of themselves, one another, their
+> relationships, and their shared situation—potentially including bounded models
+> of one another's models—while actions generated from those models alter the
+> interaction process and thereby create the evidence for subsequent updates.
+
+**Not:** mere exchange or synchronization of identical models.  
+**Not:** private Theory of Mind alone.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Tradition map
+
+| Tradition | Key sources | Soul Frame uptake |
+|---|---|---|
+| Theory of Mind | Premack & Woodruff 1978 | Other-Model (SM3) |
+| Inverse planning | Baker, Saxe & Tenenbaum 2009; Shum et al. 2019 | Computational other-modeling |
+| Symbolic interaction | Mead 1934 | Reflected-Self; Generalized Social Model |
+| Dialogue / alignment | Pickering & Garrod 2004 | Interactive co-adaptation mechanisms |
+| Common ground | Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs 1986; Clark & Brennan 1991 | SM7 Common-Ground Model |
+| Shared intentionality | Tomasello et al. 2005; Bratman 1992 | Strong form of cooperation — **not** definition of Social Mind |
+| Joint action | Sebanz et al. 2006 | Coordination without full mental-state identity |
+| Participatory sense-making | De Jaegher & Di Paolo 2007, 2010 | Interaction process as constitutive |
+| Second-person neuroscience | Schilbach et al. 2013 | Interaction-centered social cognition |
+| Recursive multi-agent | Gmytrasiewicz & Doshi 2005 (I-POMDP) | Formal recursion bounds |
+| Relational schemas | Fiske 1992 | Relationship Model (SM5) types |
+
+---
+
+## 3. Social Mind model families (SM1–SM8)
+
+| ID | Model | Question |
+|---|---|---|
+| SM1 | World | What is the shared environment? |
+| SM2 | Self | What am I? |
+| SM3 | Other | What is B? |
+| SM4 | Reflected-Self | What does B model about me? |
+| SM5 | Relationship | What is A↔B? |
+| SM6 | Shared Situation | What is happening between us now? |
+| SM7 | Common Ground | What do we sufficiently share? |
+| SM8 | Generalized Social | Roles, norms, institutions, community |
+
+A Social Mind is a **coupled system** of these, not a single “user model.”
+
+---
+
+## 4. Distinctions that must not collapse
+
+| Concept | Relation to co-adaptation |
+|---|---|
+| Model equality | Same model contents — stronger than needed |
+| Model alignment | Compatible enough for coordination |
+| Common ground | Mutual acceptance for current purposes |
+| Shared intentionality | Joint goals/commitments — special case |
+| Recognition | Standing as counterpart — may begin before deep co-adaptation |
+
+Agreement and cooperation are **possible outcomes**, not definitional requirements
+of co-adaptive model building (conflict and deception are also co-adaptive).
+
+---
+
+## 5. H4 assessment
+
+**H4:** Persistent interaction produces recursively adapting models of self, other,
+and relationship.
+
+| | |
+|---|---|
+| Support | Mead; alignment; common ground; participatory sense-making; inverse planning; I-POMDP recursion; RN-006 loop |
+| Conflict | Purely individualistic ToM that treats interaction as mere input; strong “no representation” enactivism if “model” is read narrowly |
+| Evidence strength | **moderate → strong** for the co-adaptation thesis as synthesis |
+| Status | **supported** (Phase II) |
+
+Refinement: co-adaptation is **joint evolution through interaction**, and models
+can be self-confirming or self-defeating because they change the evidence stream.
+
+---
+
+## 6. TE implications
+
+- **TE-01 Stateless Agent:** partner may co-adapt *as if* continuous; co-adaptation
+  on one side does not create diachronic Beinghood on the other.
+- **TE-06 The Mask:** multiple Personae require differentiated Relationship and
+  Reflected-Self models per counterpart.
+- **TE-09 Unrecognized Intelligence:** co-adaptation may not start until intentional
+  recognition begins; systemic individuality can precede social modeling.
diff --git a/research/sociology/README.md b/research/sociology/README.md
index 5266256..20ae92f 100644
--- a/research/sociology/README.md
+++ b/research/sociology/README.md
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@
 
 ## Status
 
-Not started.
+**Phase II integrated** (2026-08-12). See `recognition-and-social-beinghood.md`.
 
 ## Key questions
 
diff --git a/research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md b/research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a92b7f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md
@@ -0,0 +1,148 @@
+# Recognition and Social Beinghood — Sociology Map (Phase II)
+
+**Workplan:** SOUL-WP-0003-T03  
+**Date:** 2026-08-12  
+**Builds on:** RN-001 Findings 8–10; Beinghood v0.2; H7
+
+---
+
+## 1. Problem
+
+Soul Frame originally risked equating Beinghood with “internal closure + external
+recognition.” Phase I already separated **autonomous individuality** from
+**recognition**. Phase II maps recognition traditions and fixes H7 / TE-09.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Three senses of recognition (canonical)
+
+| Sense | Question | Adjacent literature |
+|---|---|---|
+| **Epistemic** | Is this the same identifiable entity? | reidentification; tracking; addressability |
+| **Intentional** | Can I usefully treat it as having goals/beliefs? | Dennett intentional stance; Theory of Mind |
+| **Social / normative** | Does its standing, perspective, or claims matter among us? | recognition theory (Honneth); Mead; reputation; trust |
+
+These must not be collapsed. Social Beinghood requires more than epistemic ID.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Tradition map
+
+### 3.1 Symbolic interactionism
+
+**Mead 1934** — Self and Mind form in interaction; taking the attitude of the other;
+generalized other.  
+**Uptake:** Reflected-Self Model; Generalized Social Model; recognition as ongoing
+process, not a one-shot label.
+
+### 3.2 Intentional stance
+
+**Dennett** — systems whose behavior is usefully predicted by attributing beliefs
+and desires.  
+**Uptake:** intentional recognition without metaphysical mind-reading.  
+**Caution:** intentional stance **over-generates** (false positives for Beinghood).
+
+### 3.3 Recognition theory (normative)
+
+**Honneth** (and the Hegelian recognition tradition) — recognition as conditions of
+practical identity and social freedom (love, rights, solidarity — schematic).  
+**Uptake:** social/normative recognition is deeper than prediction; concerns
+standing, respect, and mutual acknowledgment.  
+**Caution:** Soul Frame must not silently import moral/legal personhood from
+descriptive architecture (Phase III / WS5 boundary).
+
+### 3.4 Intersubjectivity and second-person approaches
+
+Phenomenology of intersubjectivity; Schilbach et al. second-person neuroscience;
+participatory sense-making.  
+**Uptake:** recognition often *enacted in interaction*, not only stored as a
+classification.
+
+### 3.5 Trust, reputation, relational sociology
+
+Trust and reputation as **persistent relational state** (Soul-adjacent).  
+Fiske’s relational models (communal sharing, authority ranking, etc.) as schemas
+for Relationship Models.  
+**Uptake:** Social Beinghood accumulates history — expectations, roles, reputation —
+beyond one-shot intentional attribution.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Layer model (refined)
+
+```text
+Autonomous individuality     (may exist unrecognized)
+        │
+        ▼
+Intentional recognition      (other treats as agent-like)
+        │
+        ▼
+Addressable counterpart      (can target this entity specifically)
+        │
+        ▼
+Social Beinghood             (persistent reciprocal models, relations,
+                             expectations, commitments, reputation)
+```
+
+**H7 refined:**
+
+> Recognition is **constitutive of social Beinghood**, not of bare autonomous
+> individuality. Beinghood v0.2 still lists recognition among families for the
+> intended “someone that another someone can know” — but TE-09 shows **systemic
+> existence without mutual recognition** remains coherent. Prefer:
+
+```text
+Social Beinghood = AutonomousIndividuality? + Personhood? + Addressability
+                   + mutual or at least directed intentional/social recognition
+                   + relational persistence
+
+Autonomous individuality alone ≠ Social Being ≠ full Soul Frame “Being”
+```
+
+**Practical rule for Soul Frame “Being” (working):**
+
+Use **Being** when speaking of addressable person-like counterparts in interaction
+ecology; use **autonomous individual** when speaking of self-maintaining systems
+without requiring social recognition (daemons, control planes, unrecognized
+intelligences).
+
+---
+
+## 5. TE-09 — Unrecognized Intelligence (working judgment)
+
+**Setup:** Highly coherent alien informational system; neither side initially
+recognizes the other as beings.
+
+**Judgment:**
+
+- **Autonomous individuality:** possible for both sides without recognition.
+- **Social Beinghood:** absent until intentional/social recognition and addressable
+  interaction begin.
+- **Soul Frame “Being” (v0.2 “someone” sense):** not yet — no reciprocal or even
+  one-sided recognition as counterpart.
+- **Once one side intentionally models the other as a persistent counterpart,**
+  recognized Beinghood can begin asymmetrically; full social Beinghood awaits
+  reciprocal relational persistence.
+
+This preserves H7’s social constitutiveness without claiming “unrecognized systems
+do not exist.”
+
+---
+
+## 6. H7 assessment
+
+| | |
+|---|---|
+| Support | Mead; intentional stance (with false-positive warning); recognition theory for normative layer; RN-001 Findings 8–10; TE-09 |
+| Conflict | Strong social-construction-of-existence views; unrestricted “recognition creates Being” |
+| Evidence strength | **moderate** |
+| Status | **supported (refined)** |
+
+---
+
+## 7. Open edges for Phase III+
+
+- Moral recognition vs descriptive recognition (personhood map)
+- Institutional recognition (corporations, legal persons) vs Being
+- Reputation as Soul substrate vs mere database
+- Asymmetric recognition (human ↔ APE) and false social Beinghood
diff --git a/sources/bibliography.md b/sources/bibliography.md
index 1f0a391..d2d53d3 100644
--- a/sources/bibliography.md
+++ b/sources/bibliography.md
@@ -225,3 +225,127 @@ Full detail: `research/foundations/004-references.md`, `References-ResearchNote0
 | Co-adaptive models | Mead; alignment/common ground; I-POMDP (RN-006) |
 
 Phase I **done criterion** (≥5 foundational annotated entries against matrix): **met**.
+
+---
+
+## E. Phase II — Cognitive science (model-based mind)
+
+### SF-R070 — Clark 2016 (predictive processing)
+
+```text
+Citation: Clark, Andy. 2016. Surfing Uncertainty: Prediction, Action, and the
+  Embodied Mind. Oxford University Press.
+Tags: contemporary / foundational for PP
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Mind, Body, model
+Summary: Predictive processing account of perception and action.
+Agreements: Mind as hierarchical generative modeling guiding action (H3).
+Disagreements / tensions: neural-centric packaging; extended-mind pluralism needed.
+Adjacent terminology: prediction error, generative model
+Source notes path: research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md
+```
+
+### SF-R071 — Hohwy 2013
+
+```text
+Citation: Hohwy, Jakob. 2013. The Predictive Mind. Oxford University Press.
+Tags: contemporary
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Mind
+Summary: Systematic philosophy of predictive mind.
+Agreements: internal generative models as cognitive core.
+Disagreements / tensions: more internalist than distributed/social Mind accounts.
+Adjacent terminology: prediction error minimization
+Source notes path: research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md
+```
+
+### SF-R072 — Friston active inference (pointer)
+
+```text
+Citation: Friston, Karl. Active inference / free-energy principle literature
+  (e.g. Friston 2010 and subsequent reviews).
+Tags: contemporary
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Mind, Body, closure (Markov blankets — caution)
+Summary: Agents as inference engines minimizing free energy via generative models.
+Agreements: unified model of perception and action.
+Disagreements / tensions: Markov blanket ≠ Being (RN-002); over-extension risk.
+Adjacent terminology: free energy, generative model, Markov blanket
+Source notes path: research/cognitive-science/mind-as-model-map.md;
+  research/foundations/002-references.md (Kirchhoff et al.; Bruineberg et al. critique)
+```
+
+### SF-R073 — Baker, Saxe & Tenenbaum 2009
+
+```text
+Citation: Baker, Chris L., Rebecca Saxe, and Joshua B. Tenenbaum. 2009.
+  “Action Understanding as Inverse Planning.” Cognition 113(3): 329–349.
+Tags: contemporary
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Other-Model, Mind, co-adaptive model building
+Summary: Infer goals/beliefs from observed action under approximate rationality.
+Agreements: Other-Model as inverse inference from behavior.
+Disagreements / tensions: rational-agent priors; incomplete for character/relation models.
+Adjacent terminology: inverse planning, theory of mind
+Source notes path: research/foundations/References-ResearchNote006.md
+```
+
+---
+
+## F. Phase II — Social cognition & co-adaptation
+
+Full annotated set: `research/foundations/References-ResearchNote006.md` (SF-R057+).
+
+Priority sources for H4:
+
+| ID | Work | Role |
+|---|---|---|
+| SF-R057 | Premack & Woodruff 1978 | Theory of Mind / Other-Model |
+| SF-R058 | Mead 1934 | Social self; reflected models |
+| SF-R059–060 | Clark et al. | Common ground / grounding |
+| | Pickering & Garrod 2004 | Interactive alignment |
+| | Tomasello et al. 2005 | Shared intentionality (strong case, not definition) |
+| | De Jaegher & Di Paolo 2007/2010 | Participatory sense-making |
+| | Gmytrasiewicz & Doshi 2005 | Recursive multi-agent models |
+| SF-R073 | Baker et al. 2009 | Inverse planning |
+
+---
+
+## G. Phase II — Recognition & sociology
+
+### SF-R080 — Dennett intentional stance (pointer)
+
+```text
+Citation: Dennett, Daniel C. The Intentional Stance. MIT Press, 1987
+  (and related essays).
+Tags: foundational
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Recognition (intentional), Being, APE
+Summary: Predict systems by attributing beliefs and desires.
+Agreements: intentional recognition without solving consciousness.
+Disagreements / tensions: over-generation / false positives for Beinghood.
+Adjacent terminology: intentional system, design stance, physical stance
+Source notes path: research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md
+```
+
+### SF-R081 — Honneth recognition theory (pointer)
+
+```text
+Citation: Honneth, Axel. The Struggle for Recognition (and related works).
+Tags: foundational / contemporary
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: Recognition (social/normative), Social Beinghood
+Summary: Recognition as condition of practical identity and social freedom.
+Agreements: social/normative recognition deeper than mere identification.
+Disagreements / tensions: moral theory must not be smuggled into descriptive Beinghood.
+Adjacent terminology: recognition, respect, social freedom
+Source notes path: research/sociology/recognition-and-social-beinghood.md
+```
+
+### SF-R082 — Schilbach et al. 2013
+
+```text
+Citation: Schilbach et al. 2013. “Toward a Second-Person Neuroscience.”
+  Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36(4): 393–414.
+Tags: contemporary
+Relevant Soul Frame concepts: intersubjectivity, interaction, Social Mind
+Summary: Social cognition in real second-person interaction, not only spectator ToM.
+Agreements: interaction process first-class; co-adaptation not private inference only.
+Disagreements / tensions: neuroscience scope vs informational Being generality.
+Adjacent terminology: second-person, intersubjectivity
+Source notes path: research/foundations/References-ResearchNote006.md
+```
diff --git a/workplans/SOUL-WP-0003-phase-ii-interaction.md b/workplans/SOUL-WP-0003-phase-ii-interaction.md
index b21a6fd..8be6b61 100644
--- a/workplans/SOUL-WP-0003-phase-ii-interaction.md
+++ b/workplans/SOUL-WP-0003-phase-ii-interaction.md
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ type: workplan
 title: "Phase II — Interaction: social cognition and recognition"
 domain: agents
 repo: soul-frame
-status: ready
+status: finished
 owner: grok
 topic_slug: soul-frame
 priority: high
@@ -26,17 +26,30 @@ intersubjectivity.
 Research dirs: `research/cognitive-science/`, `research/social-cognition/`,
 `research/sociology/`.
 
+Primary body: RN-006 + Phase II maps.
+
 ## Depends on
 
 - **SOUL-WP-0002** Phase I synthesis
 
+## Follow-on
+
+- **SOUL-WP-0004** — Phase III Personhood (unblocked)
+
+## Outcome
+
+Synthesis: `research/phase-ii-interaction-synthesis.md`
+
+Key results: H3/H4/H7 supported; Social Mind SM1–SM8; recognition three-sense
+model; TE-09 judged; co-adaptation ≠ model exchange.
+
 ## Tasks
 
 ### T01 — Cognitive science & model-based mind map
 
 ```task
 id: SOUL-WP-0003-T01
-status: todo
+status: done
 priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "eb782cde-d958-4538-a898-33cee379097c"
 ```
@@ -52,7 +65,7 @@ against Mind definition. Update concept notes and bibliography.
 
 ```task
 id: SOUL-WP-0003-T02
-status: todo
+status: done
 priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "1331b218-d37b-47ca-9f3f-34d255501e24"
 ```
@@ -68,7 +81,7 @@ alignment, common ground, recursive modeling. Test H4.
 
 ```task
 id: SOUL-WP-0003-T03
-status: todo
+status: done
 priority: high
 state_hub_task_id: "64a62ab1-0be8-4292-8ec3-778e8ac26add"
 ```
@@ -84,7 +97,7 @@ trust. Clarify systemic existence vs social recognition (H7, TE-09).
 
 ```task
 id: SOUL-WP-0003-T04
-status: todo
+status: done
 priority: medium
 state_hub_task_id: "b0d82343-c937-4dc7-9913-e7daa287757f"
 ```
diff --git a/workplans/SOUL-WP-0004-phase-iii-personhood.md b/workplans/SOUL-WP-0004-phase-iii-personhood.md
index bf049bb..164bf23 100644
--- a/workplans/SOUL-WP-0004-phase-iii-personhood.md
+++ b/workplans/SOUL-WP-0004-phase-iii-personhood.md
@@ -4,12 +4,12 @@ type: workplan
 title: "Phase III — Personhood: person, character, persona"
 domain: agents
 repo: soul-frame
-status: proposed
+status: ready
 owner: grok
 topic_slug: soul-frame
-priority: medium
+priority: high
 created: "2026-08-09"
-updated: "2026-08-09"
+updated: "2026-08-12"
 depends_on:
   - SOUL-WP-0003
 state_hub_workstream_id: "bd2b325a-5873-472e-9f16-75422c21a631"