ADR-056: A TERM says what job its definition does (disambiguation, construct, criterion or position), piloted on a sample before it becomes a field, and a criterion TERM carries an application contract that keeps its criterion apart from its indicators

Context

At U11 of the exchange of 2026-10-26, “About the Chagossians”, the owner asked for a TERM for “organizational achievement”, and A11 gave it “a target-relative, causally discriminating definition” (TERM-086). At U12 the owner quoted that phrase: “I feel like we need a lot of our TERMs to be like this, maybe this is a particular ‘kind’ within the TERM schema we should distinguish. There’s probably a refinement availability here.”

The record’s TERMs already do different jobs, which their titles show and the schema does not. Six are “X, and which sense” maps: TERM-045 (self), TERM-068 (closure), TERM-071 (persistence), TERM-072 (perspective), TERM-074 (organization) and TERM-075 (attributed self). Others state when a concept applies, with something to compute or check: TERM-055 (operational availability), TERM-064 (legibility), TERM-069 (observational equivalence). Others introduce an object of the record’s own theory, as TERM-023 (will-organization) does, and TERM-059 names a position without adopting it. ADR-050, Proposed, is the nearest rule: a claim that uses “organized”, “effective”, “agent” and similar words says which sense or criterion it means. It governs uses of words; this decision governs what a TERM is for.

The schema has the precedent. ADR-042 gave CASE a kind, orthogonal to its standing, and ADR-043 gave CLAIM a warrant, orthogonal to its status and role. And TERM already has the relations a “refinement” would use: refines/refined_by, rivals and complements (ADR-046).

Decision

Proposed, for the owner’s adoption.

• Four kinds, from A12:

kind	job	examples A12 gave
disambiguation	separates senses that must not be conflated	TERM-045, TERM-071, TERM-074
construct	introduces a defined theoretical object or mechanism	TERM-023
criterion	states the conditions under which a concept applies, with a formal, causal, observational or normative way of assessing them	TERM-055, TERM-069, TERM-044
position	names an articulated position without adopting it	TERM-059

A12 preferred criterion to operational because “Not all meaningful criteria are empirical tests”: a criterion of moral standing gives normative reasons, not a behavioural probe.

• What the field says. A12: “TERM kind should identify the definition’s function. It should not communicate its truth, warrant, or adoption status.” Those stay with status (ADR-046) and, for the claims stated in a term, with warrant.

• An application contract for a criterion TERM, in its body, not as new fields: bearer (what can have the property), target (for which task or question), conditions (contexts, interventions, resources, scales, times), criterion (what licenses applying it), discrimination (which nearby concept it rules out), evidence (what counts for or against an application) and non-entailments (what stronger claims do not follow).

• Criterion is not indicator. A12: “A constitutive criterion says what makes something count as an instance of the concept. A diagnostic indicator supplies evidence that the criterion is satisfied.” A reliable behavioural indicator of consciousness is not a condition of it; one successful episode is evidence of a maintained competence, not the competence. A12 proposed adding the distinction to ADR-050’s table; it is recorded here and left there for the owner.

• The division of labour. A12: “A TERM supplies the criterion; a CLAIM argues that some proposed generalization holds; a CASE supplies observations or a construction; an ARG connects them.” A criterion TERM need not prove its own applications.

• Refinement stays a relation. The owner’s “refinement availability” is ADR-046’s refines, and it stays separate from kind. A12’s caution: “We should not create a refines edge just because two concepts sound related. The narrower term needs additional conditions on the broader term, not a change in what type of thing it denotes.” So organizational competence could refine TERM-086’s capacity mode, but not an achievement defined as an event.

• Pilot first. The field is not added to luria.yaml by this decision. The pilot classifies a deliberately mixed sample, at least A12’s nine (TERM-045, TERM-071, TERM-074, TERM-023, TERM-055, TERM-069, TERM-044, TERM-059 and TERM-072), and the terms filed with this decision, and reports where the kinds force an arbitrary choice. TERM-072 is the stress test: it is both a map of three senses and a substantive definition of the first. A12: “if it consistently creates incompatible expectations for what belongs in the entry, the solution may be to split the sense map from the specific construct.” The field becomes optional in the schema only if the pilot finds that the kinds sort the record without arbitrary choices and give a view or a review decision the record lacks; A12: “Merely classifying all existing TERMs successfully does not establish the benefit of the new field.”

Alternatives

• No kinds; prose only. The titles already carry “and which sense” for one kind. The cost is the one the owner named: a definition meant as a criterion, like TERM-086’s, reads like a construct unless its contract is asked for.
• A required field now. ADR-042’s route was to pilot and then require. A required field on 79 terms before the kinds are tested would force the arbitrary choices the pilot is meant to find.
• Fields for the contract. Seven structured fields per criterion term would be ceremony before anyone knows the contract is the right one. The body is enough for a pilot.
• Make “target-relative, causally discriminating” the definition of criterion. A12 rejected it: “it does not follow that every useful definition must be target-relative and causally discriminating. Some definitions are purely formal. Others explicitly separate meanings. Normative concepts require justificatory criteria rather than only causal comparisons.”

Consequences

• Six TERMs are filed with this decision as its first cases, all Proposed: TERM-086 (organizational achievement, a criterion while its comparison requirement stands), TERM-085 (correctability, a criterion), TERM-082 (consciousness) and TERM-080 (collective intention), both disambiguations, and TERM-083 (moral standing) with TERM-081 (moral worth), a normative criterion and a disambiguation. None carries a kind field; the kinds named here are this decision’s reading of them.
• If adopted, the pilot is the next filing, and its report goes in a curation entry.
• If the owner adopts ADR-050 as well, the criterion-or-indicator row is the natural addition to its table.