Conceptio › Archive › PhilArchive
PhilArchive open access

Framework Revision Without a Global Editor: The Revision Typology, Retraction and Retention Rules per Leaf, and the Annotation-Cascade Calculus

Uchida, Tomoyuki
PhilArchive · Papers
Open Source ↗
philosophy
When a many-paper formal framework must change its mind — a computational defect found in a deposited paper, a conditional whose antecedent a later audit moves, a pricing sharpened by a later result — who edits? This paper, the sixty-fifth in a sequence developing an interpretive framework that redescribes physical reality as a causally consistent history of information updates, and the closing panel of its L-type Audition Program, personifies the implicit answer as the Global Editor: the authority with retroactive write access to the corpus's history, for whom consistency is maintained by silently updating the record until it agrees with itself. Its practice-side shadow is familiar — the updated preprint with no change log, the silently corrected equation, the claim whose history is unrecoverable across versions. The sequence had built against it piecemeal: deposited texts are DOI-immutable, registers are frozen, upgrades are annotation-only, new versions carry itemized notes re-verified at gates. But piecemeal discipline is precedent, not law, and the place precedent predictably breaks is under load: the sibling audition panel left a live adoption-triggered branch whose execution would touch frozen conditionals across a dozen papers at once. Without a cascade calculus the honest options degenerate to "rewrite everything" (the Editor) or "annotate nothing" (unannotated staleness accumulating in the record). This paper replaces the precedent with an explicit, checkable discipline, under the registered controlling phrase: the corpus may revise its standings, but it never rewrites its past. The revision typology fixes four acts, none of which changes content-at-address: annotate (add-only marginal content on a frozen register); re-version (a full version bump with an itemized note and re-run gates, or a status pass — with the deposited-artifact rule that no act replaces a deposited object: a re-version at that status creates a new deposited successor and a forward-supersession relation); retract (a claim's downstream-consumption license withdrawn while its text stands, the notice itself a record); and retain-as-conditional (the falsified-antecedent case: the conditional survives as the theorem it always was, with the antecedent's status recorded — only the consumption right changes). An act-selection function over leaf type, defect type, and deposit status is proven total and decidable, with the load-bearing boundary registered: an error at the time of assertion selects withdrawal; a later change in an antecedent's status, with the original derivation still correct under its stated condition, selects retention-as-conditional. A revision authority layer types who may do what, and its flagship display is a structurally empty column: no role — author, reviewer, or owner — holds rewrite authority over any frozen claim. An annotation-cascade calculus makes propagation mechanical over the declared consumption graph, with mode-typed obligations, guaranteed termination, and a non-retro invariant proven act by act; an undeclared consumption is itself a typed defect whose discovery degrades incompleteness to late notification, never silent inconsistency. The discipline is then checked, not validated: applied to the corpus's own executed revision history — eleven in-place re-versions, five status-insertion passes, add-only annotation formulas, and deviation-note routings — the selection function returns, for every instance, the act that was actually performed; the two acts history never exercised (retraction; retention-as-conditional) are supported instead by independent constraints and displayed negative cases, and the paper says so. The comparison with the belief-revision tradition is made at operator level: AGM contraction's success postulate is unsatisfiable on an immutable public record, its recovery postulate holds trivially where nothing is removed, minimal mutilation is replaced by declared
Conceptio Open Archive

Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio

Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.

This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗

Related documents

Record · ID 692581
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive