Decision Continuity
Status
Canonical source repository: Admissible-Existence/DC
Wiki state: watching
Detail status: initial public-safe canonical detail page
Definition
Decision Continuity is a canonical formalism for evaluating whether decision standing persists across review, handoff, state change, publication, or execution boundaries.
It supports inspection of whether a later action can still rely on a prior decision record, or whether the decision must be re-bound against current authority, evidence, policy, and boundary state.
Source Boundary
Admissible-Existence defines the formalism. Publisher publishes papers and public exposition. The Admissibility Wiki mirrors, relates, crosswalks, and discovers relationships.
The wiki is not the source authority for this formalism.
Scope
Decision Continuity applies where a decision record must preserve standing across time, systems, actors, receipts, or state transitions.
Purpose
The purpose of Decision Continuity is to prevent systems from treating an old decision artifact as current authority when the conditions that made it admissible may have changed.
Core Constructs
| Construct | Role |
|---|---|
| Decision record | Record of a decision, review, or authority posture. |
| Decision standing | Whether the decision can still support consequence. |
| Decision continuity | Whether standing survives across transition boundaries. |
| Rebinding | A renewed check against current state. |
| Supersession | Replacement of an older decision record by a newer one. |
| Receipt | Record supporting reconstruction of the decision path. |
Related Canonical Formalisms
| Related Formalism | Relationship |
|---|---|
| State Transition Continuity Model | Evaluates state continuity around decision records. |
| Runtime Transition Governance | Applies decision standing at runtime or publication time. |
| Transition Table | Classifies the posture of decision-bearing transitions. |
| Boundary Conditions | Determines whether boundary standing still holds. |
| Data Continuity | Preserves evidence supporting decision standing. |
| Continuity Handoff Formalism | Preserves decision context across handoffs. |
Mathematical Candidates
Status: pending source-confirmed extraction from canonical source or publication artifacts.
Proof Candidates
Status: pending source-confirmed extraction from canonical source or publication artifacts.
Validation Candidates
Status: pending source-confirmed extraction from canonical source or publication artifacts.
Validation candidates should include stale decision, superseded decision, changed authority, changed policy, and decision rebinding cases when public-safe source artifacts are available.
Publication Artifacts
Status: pending source-confirmed extraction.
Reference Implementations
Status: pending source-confirmed extraction.
External Crosswalk Targets
| External Framework | Relationship |
|---|---|
| GLM | May help declare the decision frame, claims, and non-claims before review. |
| EVIDE | May help preserve post-event evidence needed to reconstruct decision standing. |
These are crosswalk targets only. They do not replace canonical formalism definition.
Open Questions
Which exact Admissible-Existence source file defines Decision Continuity?
Which decision states are canonical versus explanatory?
Which tests validate stale, superseded, and re-bound decisions?
Which receipt fields are required for reconstructing decision standing?
Non-Claims
This wiki page does not define, prove, or validate the formalism. External framework mappings are crosswalk candidates, not equivalence decisions. A listed relationship does not imply accepted formal equivalence.