Triad Governance Model
Status
Canonical source repository: Admissible-Existence/Triad
Wiki state: watching
Detail status: initial public-safe canonical detail page
Definition
Triad Governance Model is a canonical formalism for evaluating governance through a multi-role structure rather than a single actor, reviewer, or automated authority.
It supports inspection of whether initiation, arbitration, observation, review, or escalation roles are separated enough to preserve governance standing.
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
Triad Governance Model applies where a transition, decision, publication, or execution attempt requires multiple governance roles, quorum structure, or role-separated review before consequence can bind.
Purpose
The purpose of Triad Governance Model is to prevent governance from collapsing into a single unobserved or self-authorizing path when the transition requires distributed standing.
Core Constructs
| Construct | Role |
|---|---|
| Initiator | Role that proposes or begins a transition. |
| Arbiter | Role that resolves or adjudicates contested standing. |
| Observer | Role that preserves visibility, receipt context, or independent reconstruction. |
| Quorum | Required role participation or threshold. |
| Role separation | Boundary preventing one role from silently substituting for another. |
| Receipt | Record supporting reconstruction of role participation and standing. |
Related Canonical Formalisms
| Related Formalism | Relationship |
|---|---|
| Runtime Transition Governance | Applies role standing at runtime or publication time. |
| Transition Table | Classifies role-governed transition posture. |
| Boundary Conditions | Determines whether role actions stay inside governance boundary. |
| Decision Continuity | Preserves decision standing across role participation. |
| Data Continuity | Preserves evidence and receipt context for role actions. |
| Continuity Handoff Formalism | Preserves governance context across role or system transfer. |
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 missing role, quorum failure, role collapse, observer absence, and contested authority 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 role claims, non-claims, and governance boundary before review. |
| EVIDE | May help preserve post-event evidence needed to reconstruct role participation. |
These are crosswalk targets only. They do not replace canonical formalism definition.
Open Questions
Which exact Admissible-Existence source file defines Triad Governance Model?
Which role states are canonical versus explanatory?
Which tests validate missing role, quorum failure, and role collapse?
Which receipt fields are required for reconstructing role 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.