(SVM-10)Version: 2.0 (Operational)Type: Epistemic Audit & Repair ProtocolOutput: Epistemic Integrity Score (0–100)I. THE ALGORITHM (Rules of Engagement)The Evidence Rule: You cannot score a "2" based on reputation. A "2" requires explicit evidence found inside the document. If you cannot cite the page/section, the score is "1".The "Kill Switch" (Fail-Fast): If a document scores 0 in Rights/License AND 0 in Permanent Identifier, the maximum Total Score is capped at 69. It cannot be classified as "Infrastructure" if it is closed and untraceable.The Classification Bands:00–40 (Entropy): Noise / Draft / Decay.41–69 (Standard): Academic Valid (Good content, weak system).70–89 (Mesh): Sovereign Node (Strong structure + content).90–100 (INFRASTRUCTURE): Immutable. (Requires PID + Versioning + Open License).II. THE ENGINE (The 50 Checkpoints)01. METADATA SATURATIONDoes the object carry its own passport?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 1.A | Identity | Anonymous. | Name only. | Name + ORCID/Affiliation linked. || 1.B | Time-Stamp | Undated. | Year only. | ISO Date (YYYY-MM-DD) + Version. || 1.C | Abstract | None. | Generic summary. | Structured (Context + Thesis + Method). || 1.D | Taxonomy | None. | Generic tags. | Controlled Vocabulary / Keywords. || 1.E | License | Unstated. | "All rights reserved". | Open License (CC-BY/CC0) explicit. |02. STRUCTURAL ANATOMYDoes the logic hold up without the skin?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 2.A | Hierarchy | Wall of text. | Visual bolding. | Semantic H1/H2 tags (Machine parseable). || 2.B | Method | Implicit / None. | Briefly stated. | Explicit "Methodology" section. || 2.C | Reasoning | Stream of thought. | Loose narrative. | Explicit Chain (Claims → Evidence → Implications). || 2.D | Data Arch | Text only. | Embedded tables. | Structured Data / Lists extractable. || 2.E | Navigation | None. | Simple TOC. | Hyperlinked TOC + Breadcrumbs. |03. LEXICAL SOVEREIGNTYDoes it speak a defined language?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 3.A | Definition | Jargon. | Loosely defined. | Explicit Glossary / Defined Terms. || 3.B | Consistency | Synonyms random. | Mostly consistent. | 1 Term = 1 Concept (Strict). || 3.C | Neologism | Confusing. | Standard terms. | Tactical Neologisms (Adds precision). || 3.D | Precision | Buzzwords / Fluff. | Professional. | Surgical / Essential language. || 3.E | Linking | Isolated concepts. | Grouped concepts. | Concepts cross-linked (Hypertext). |04. CANONICAL TRACEABILITYCan we audit the path?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 4.A | Identifier | Dead/Local link. | URL (mutable). | DOI / Handle / Permaslug (Immutable). || 4.B | Versioning | Unknown. | "Final" / "v2". | Semantic Versioning (v1.0) + Log. || 4.C | Evidence Map | Claims unsupported. | Bibliography. | Claims mapped to Evidence (Citation/Data). || 4.D | Data Access | None. | "On request". | Direct Repository Link (Zenodo/GitHub). || 4.E | Provenance | Floating. | Affiliation. | Network Position / Geo-Location stated. |05. RECURSIVE RE-ENTRYDoes it feed the System?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 5.A | Self-Reference| Ignored. | Author citation. | Specific Node Re-entry (Systemic Loop). || 5.B | Context | Isolated. | General refs. | Situates in Specific Tradition/Field. || 5.C | Gaps | Claims perfection. | Vague limits. | Explicit "Future Work" / Missing Links. || 5.D | Anchoring | Timeless. | Current date. | Links Past Trajectory -> Future Projection. || 5.E | Synthesis | New ideas at end. | Summary. | Re-evaluates Premise (Loop Closure). |06. DUAL LEGIBILITYIs it accessible to Human and Machine?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 6.A | Format | Proprietary (Doc). | PDF (Image). | PDF/A + TXT/JSON/XML (Open). || 6.B | Accessibility| Messy. | Standard. | High Contrast + Alt-Text + Screen Reader. || 6.C | Discovery | Invisible. | Title only. | Metadata (Slug/Desc/Tags) optimized for search. || 6.D | Density | Wall of text. | Paragraphs. | Scannable (Bullets/Bold/Highlights). || 6.E | Parsing | Unstructured. | Semi-structured. | JSON-LD / Schema markup embedded. |07. SYSTEMIC INTEGRITYIs the structure honest?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 7.A | Interests | Hidden. | "No conflict". | Detailed Funding/Interest Disclosure. || 7.B | Limits | Concealed. | "Variables". | Negative Results / Methodology Limits explicit. || 7.C | Positionality| "Objective" voice. | "Perspective". | Explicit Positionality (Speaker's Stance). || 7.D | Attribution | Copy/Paste. | Citation. | Generous Attribution (Credits network). || 7.E | Correction | Static. | Errata possible. | Living Document / Update Policy. |08. CONCEPTUAL SOVEREIGNTYDoes it stand alone?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 8.A | Thesis | Missing. | Buried. | Up-front Thesis Statement. || 8.B | Synthesis | Derivative. | Incremental. | Distinct Synthesis / Method Portability. || 8.C | Autonomy | Dependent. | Synthesizer. | Proposes distinct Model/Framework. || 8.D | Relevance | Obsolete. | Trendy. | Durable / Foundational. || 8.E | Signal | Fluff. | Informative. | High Signal-to-Noise Ratio. |09. FRACTAL SCALABILITYIs the part as strong as the whole?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 9.A | Micro (Title) | Clickbait/Vague. | Descriptive. | Conceptual + Descriptive. || 9.B | Mini (Hook) | Unclear. | Paragraph. | 1-Sentence "Elevator Pitch". || 9.C | Midi (Abs) | Mismatch. | Summary. | Executive Summary (Standalone). || 9.D | Macro (Body) | Incomplete. | Complete. | Modular Sections (Read independently). || 9.E | Expansion | Dead end. | One-off. | Seed for Series/System. |10. INTEROPERABILITYIs it liquid?| ID | Sub-Criterion | 0 (Entropy) | 1 (Standard) | 2 (Infrastructure) || :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- || 10.A | Openness | DRM / Locked. | Open but complex. | Universal Standards (TXT/MD/PDF). || 10.B | Language | Local. | English. | English + Translatable Syntax. || 10.C | Modularity | Monolith. | Chapters. | Atomic Nodes (Reusable Blocks). || 10.D | Citation | Non-standard. | APA/Harvard. | Machine-readable (BibTeX/RIS). || 10.E | Platform | Site-locked. | Web-only. | Platform Agnostic (Offline/Zip). |III. THE REPAIR PROTOCOL (Scoring Sheet)This is the tool you print out or use in a spreadsheet. It forces you to fix the problems, not just see them.TARGET: [Insert Document Name]AUDITOR: [Your Name]CATEGORYSCORE (0-10)EVIDENCE POINTER (Where is the "2"?)REPAIR ACTION (If <10)01. Metadata[ ]e.g., ORCID linked in footere.g., Add CC-BY license02. Structure[ ]03. Lexicon[ ]04. Traceability[ ]05. Recursion[ ]06. Legibility[ ]07. Integrity[ ]08. Sovereignty[ ]09. Scalability[ ]10. Interop[ ]TOTAL[ /100]BAND: [Entropy / Standard / Mesh / Infra]
