The Concept AXN: Implementing the Stable Work Relation the LABOR Invariant Already Specifies
Description
Seven editions of one work carried one backward pointer and zero forward pointers, so a reader arriving at the edition a search engine is most likely to hold had no route to the current state. Forward-pointing every prior edition on each version bump is order-n work per version and conflicts with content-addressing, since editing a published edition either changes its hash or places the pointer outside the hashed content where a copy of the deposit does not carry it. The resolution is a concept-level identifier resolving to the current edition, order-one forever. REFRAMED BEFORE DEPOSIT: this is not a new identifier type. The LABOR canonical invariant already specifies AXN root as a stable work relation beside AXN version as an immutable version relation, and the AXN protocol now carries that at identity semantics. What is missing is narrower and is recorded there as a known gap -- root_axn is composed from the per-deposit hex and is therefore not stable across editions. This document is an implementation proposal for an existing invariant, and its derivation section states the open design question.
Wiki Article
Concepts Defined
Full Text
The Concept AXN: Implementing the Stable Work Relation the LABOR Invariant Already Specifies
Methodology
Measured against the capture registry's own version chain: editions enumerated from the registry, forward and backward pointers counted. Derivation candidates compared for stability under edition restoration, since the archive has restored early editions and cannot treat first-edition bytes as a stable quantity. Grammar conformance checked against the AXN protocol's compose and derive functions.
Falsification Conditions
The scheme fails if two distinct works can produce the same work identifier, since the derivation would collide. The honesty requirement fails in practice if a concept AXN is ever cited as evidence for a textual claim, which would show the family marker insufficient. The order-n argument is falsified if forward-pointing can be shown to preserve content-addressing without placing the pointer outside the hashed content.
THE CONCEPT AXN
A version-stable identifier for a work across its editions
⚠ REFRAMED BEFORE DEPOSIT. This document was drafted as a proposal for a NEW identifier type. It is not one. The LABOR canonical invariant already specifiesAXN root = stable work relationbesideAXN version = immutable version relation— the two-level scheme is law, not a proposal, andapi/axn-protocol.jsonnow carries it atidentity_semantics.
What is actually missing is narrower and is recorded in the protocol as aknown_gap:root_axnis composed from the per-deposit hex, so it is not stable across editions of one work. Two editions of the same work carry different roots today. Read everything below as an implementation proposal for an existing invariant, and read §III's derivation as the open design question — whether a stable root is derived from the work identifier or allocated with the first edition.
I. The defect
Older versions of a work do not point forward to the current one. Measured on the capture registry:
| deposit | version | supersedes | superseded_by |
|---|---|---|---|
| #825 | v7.2 | — | — |
| #936 | v8.9 | — | — |
| #1396 | v0.2-restored | — | — |
| #1397 | v6.1 | — | — |
| #1398 | v1.0 | — | — |
| #1401 | v1.0 | — | — |
| #1461 | v10.9 | ✓ | — |
Seven editions of one work. One backward pointer, zero forward pointers. A reader arriving at #936 has no way to learn that v10.9 exists, and #936 is what a search engine is most likely to have indexed, because it has been public longest.
This is the archive's own subject arriving at home: a stale state, confidently addressable, with the current state unreachable from it.
II. Why the obvious fix is the wrong fix
The obvious repair is to write superseded_by into every prior edition on each version bump.
That is O(n) writes per version and the n grows. Seven editions today; the eleventh bump rewrites ten records. Worse, it violates a property the archive depends on: a deposit's canonical text is content-addressed, and its AXN is derived from those bytes. Editing a published edition to add a forward pointer either changes its hash — invalidating its identifier — or requires the pointer to live outside the hashed content, in which case it is registry metadata that a copy of the deposit does not carry.
So forward-pointing is expensive, fragile, and does not travel with the object. It should not be the mechanism.
III. The concept AXN
One identifier for the work, allocated once, resolving to the current edition. O(1) forever.
Exactly the concept-DOI relation the archive already relies on from the Zenodo chain — where EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 carried concept DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20683855 beside first-version DOI …856.
CONCEPT AXN AXN:<hex>.CONCEPT.<glyph> the work, across all editions → resolves to current VERSION AXN AXN:<hex>.<FAMILY>.<glyph> one edition, content-derived, immutable, permanent
A version AXN never changes and never learns about its successors. The concept AXN is the only thing that moves, and it moves by a single write to the resolver.
Derivation
The glyph derives from sha256(work_identifier) — the stable work id, not any edition's bytes:
EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 → sha256 fe289e1f8d29e9ee… → ♻️⛩️■☁️🎲🕌
This is grammar-conformant: compose_axn takes any family, axn_glyph_from_hash takes any sha256. Nothing new is invented.
Why the work id rather than the first edition's hash. Zenodo allocates the concept DOI with v1, which privileges v1's bytes. The archive cannot afford that: #1396 is a restored edition of an early version, so "the first edition's bytes" is not a stable quantity here. Deriving from the work id means the concept AXN is reproducible by anyone who knows the work identifier, forever, without access to any edition at all — including after a deletion event.
The honesty requirement
The apparatus grammar (#1077, device 4) states:
An AXN verifies the identity and integrity of the addressed content; a URL merely locates a resource.
A concept AXN does not do that, and must not be allowed to imply it. Its referent changes by design. It verifies work identity; it does not verify content integrity, because there is no fixed content to verify.
The CONCEPT family name carries that distinction in the identifier itself rather than in documentation a compression will drop. A reader or a machine meeting AXN:xxxx.CONCEPT.… is told, in the identifier, that this addresses a work and not a byte sequence.
Rule: never cite a concept AXN as evidence for a claim about content. Cite the version AXN. The concept AXN is for "the current state of this instrument", never for "the text said X."
IV. What this replaces and what it does not
Replaces version_series_id — currently a bare string on 160 deposits (SERIES-EA-ARK-01-ARCHON), which is not resolvable, not citable, and not in the identifier namespace. Concept AXNs should supersede it, with the existing strings mapped rather than discarded.
Does not replace supersedes. A backward pointer is written once, at mint, by the edition that knows — it is O(1) and it belongs in the new edition's own hashed content. Keep it. The asymmetry is the point: backward pointers are cheap and permanent; forward pointers are expensive and perishable, so the forward direction is served by resolution instead of by writing.
Does not replace superseded_by_deposit_number where it already exists on 156 deposits. Those are historical adjudications and should stand. New chains use the concept AXN.
V. Protocol addition
At mint, a deposit that belongs to a versioned work carries:
concept_axn AXN:<hex>.CONCEPT.<glyph> stable across editions
work_id EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 what the glyph derives from
version v10.9
supersedes [{deposit_number, version}] written once, backward onlyAnd the resolver holds one row per work:
concept_axn → current_version_axn · current_deposit · updated_at
A version bump is one write to that row. No prior edition is touched, no hash is invalidated, no forward pointer is stored in content that would go stale the moment it was written.
The transition record
Per the apparatus grammar's transition ledger (#1077 §3.1), each move appends: previous state · new state · effective date · reason · evidence · responsible operator · prior text hash · replacement text hash — and the earlier state remains addressable. The concept AXN is what makes "remains addressable" cheap: the old edition keeps its own AXN forever and needs no maintenance to stay findable.
VI. First case
EA-WG-CAPTURES-01, seven editions, AXN:<next>.CONCEPT.♻️⛩️■☁️🎲🕌, resolving to #1461 v10.9.
Then the works with the longest chains: EA-ARK-01 (💛🎻🕓♉💫🌋), EA-SPXI-01 (🌖🌪️🎆☿🎆🚀), the GW.TACHYON continuity series, the DOI registry chain.
VII. What is claimed, and what is not
Claimed. That forward-pointing is O(n) per version and conflicts with content-addressing; that a concept identifier is O(1) and is the standard solution; that deriving the glyph from the work id rather than an edition's bytes is more robust for an archive that has had to restore editions; and that the CONCEPT family is required so the identifier states its own weaker guarantee.
Not claimed. That this is novel — it is the concept-DOI pattern, which the archive already consumed from Zenodo and should now mint natively. That the hex allocation is settled: hexes are opaque sequential, and whether concept AXNs draw from the same sequence as deposits or a reserved range is a decision this document does not make. That the resolver work is small — axn-resolution.json ships on multiple surfaces and every one of them would need the new row shape.
Falsifiable. If two distinct works can produce the same work id, the derivation collides and the scheme fails. If a concept AXN is ever cited as evidence for a textual claim, the honesty requirement has failed in practice and the family marker is insufficient.
Traversal
- #825 AI Overview Capture Registry EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v6.0 — 87 captures by EA identifier
- #936 AI Overview Capture Registry — EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v8.9 — 195 documented captures, includi by deposit number
- #1396 AI Overview Capture Registry — June 2026 (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v7.2, 131 captures, sorted b by deposit number
- #1397 AI Overview Capture Registry — June 2026 (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v6.1, 87 captures, machine-r by deposit number
- #1398 AI Overview Capture Registry — June 2026 (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v7.0, 87 captures, collapsib by deposit number
- #1401 AI Overview Capture Registry — June 2026 (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v7.2, 131 captures sorted by by deposit number
- #1461 AI Overview Capture Registry — EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v10.9 — 328 semantic addresses, 470 cap by deposit number
- #1077 EA-APPARATUS-01 v0.3: The Apparatus Grammar — A Standard for Care-Attended Compression S by deposit number
No comments:
Post a Comment