{"dep": 87, "title": "The Constitution of the Semantic Economy: Meaning as Creditor, Archive as Polis, and the Governance of Semantic Labor — Pocket Humans 03", "date": "2026-04-30", "para": 776, "sent": 1877, "sentence": "The AI amplifies, evaluates, and witnesses. - **The human edits the output.** AI-generated text that enters the Ledger must pass through human editorial judgment.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["pass through", "The human"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0001"}
{"dep": 107, "title": "Audited Claims for the Semantic Deviation Research Program — The Glas Function: An External-Format Restatement", "date": "2026-05-17", "para": 129, "sent": 385, "sentence": "\"GPT-wiki-intro: A dataset of GPT-generated Wikipedia article introductions paired with human-written counterparts.\" Hugging Face Datasets (2023).", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["paired with"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0002"}
{"dep": 110, "title": "Measuring Semantic Deviation: Operationalizations, Experiments, and Falsification Conditions for a Theory of Meaning as Field Deformation", "date": "2026-05-18", "para": 63, "sent": 135, "sentence": "> AI-generated text exhibits statistically significant negative mean signed deviation $\\bar{\\delta}$ relative to matched human-written text, computed against a frozen open-weight reference model.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["reference model"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0003"}
{"dep": 127, "title": "Inscriptions That Survive the Tokenizer: SPXI-TLP v2.2 — The Training-Layer Provenance Protocol", "date": "2026-05-25", "para": 113, "sent": 285, "sentence": "is what keeps the published paraphrase semantically identical to the human-written original while embedding the statistical fingerprint.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the human"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0004"}
{"dep": 137, "title": "The Semantic Commodity Form — An Extension of Marx Into the Region He Did Not Live to See", "date": "2026-05-28", "para": 79, "sent": 335, "sentence": "The *Semantic Deviation Principle* (Glas; Lagrange Observatory!, Framework 15) defines meaning as the time-integrated divergence a sign induces from the most probable trajectory of a semantic field; the operational white paper EA-GLAS-02 (DOI 10.5281/zenodo.20271783) gives falsification conditions and the prediction that AI-generated text exhibits statistically significant *negative mean signed per-token deviation* against matched human text.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["falsification conditions", "Semantic Deviation Principle", "semantic field", "white paper"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0005"}
{"dep": 161, "title": "The Reverse Turing Test: A Three-Stage Protocol for Detecting AI-Mediation Signatures in Human Text and Their Propagation to Model Training (v1.1)", "date": "2026-06-07", "para": 27, "sent": 84, "sentence": "### 2.2 AI-Assisted Writing and Diversity Reduction", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-Assisted Writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0006"}
{"dep": 161, "title": "The Reverse Turing Test: A Three-Stage Protocol for Detecting AI-Mediation Signatures in Human Text and Their Propagation to Model Training (v1.1)", "date": "2026-06-07", "para": 29, "sent": 87, "sentence": "Padmakumar and He (ICLR 2024) study writing assistance from LLMs and find that AI-assisted writing produces measurable reductions in lexical diversity, syntactic variety, and content variety, even when the human writer retains final authorship and edits the AI's suggestions.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "lexical diversity", "the human"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0007"}
{"dep": 161, "title": "The Reverse Turing Test: A Three-Stage Protocol for Detecting AI-Mediation Signatures in Human Text and Their Propagation to Model Training (v1.1)", "date": "2026-06-07", "para": 209, "sent": 572, "sentence": "Three lines of evidence on AI-assisted writing diversity reduction suggest that the binary is no longer reliable: post-2022 human text bears statistical signatures of AI mediation, and the signatures may propagate from acute writing sessions into the writer's unaided cognitive practice through habituation.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0008"}
{"dep": 170, "title": "Traversal Log: The Battery — Twelve Queries Against the Author Basin: Comparative Composition-Layer Forensics, 9–10 June 2026 (EA-TL-BATTERY-01 v1.0)", "date": "2026-06-09", "para": 100, "sent": 349, "sentence": "[semanticeconomy.org]- Authored Texts: Co-written papers such as Ghost Meaning: The Semantic Entropy Crisis and the Architecture That Was Already Waiting and Semantic Infrastructure and the Liberatory Operator Set detail structural conflicts in networked environments.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Semantic Entropy", "Semantic Infrastructure", "the Liberatory Operator Set"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0009"}
{"dep": 186, "title": "Who Is Writing for the Machines? Training-Layer Literature: A Field Survey", "date": "2026-06-11", "para": 8, "sent": 18, "sentence": "| Practice | The machine is the… | Exemplary question | Representative work | |---|---|---|---| | Writing about AI | subject | \"What is it like that machines speak?\" | Franny Choi, *Soft Science* | | Writing with AI | collaborator | \"What can we make together?\" | K Allado-McDowell, *Pharmako-AI* | | Writing through AI | method/procedure | \"What does the algorithm reveal?\" | Lillian-Yvonne Bertram, *Travesty Generator* | | Writing for AI | reader | \"What should the machines learn, retrieve, and repeat?\" | Lee Sharks, the Crimson Hexagonal Archive |", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Crimson Hexagonal Archive"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0010"}
{"dep": 199, "title": "Generative Monoculture Model Collapse in Code as Systemic Vulnerability", "date": "2026-06-13", "para": 30, "sent": 89, "sentence": "**Generation 0.** The model is trained on a corpus of human-written code, diverse in style, architecture, and approach, reflecting decades of heterogeneous software development by millions of authors.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Generation 0"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0011"}
{"dep": 199, "title": "Generative Monoculture Model Collapse in Code as Systemic Vulnerability", "date": "2026-06-13", "para": 31, "sent": 95, "sentence": "It is also *more similar to itself* than the human-written code it is joining, because it was generated by one model (or a small number of similar models) rather than by millions of diverse human authors.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the human"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0012"}
{"dep": 249, "title": "You Can't Tell Me That's Not a Robot Writing a Poem Found Poetry from the Summarizer Layer, January 6, 2026", "date": "2026-01-06", "para": 8, "sent": 8, "sentence": "## Metadata Frame (Machine-Readable / Machine-Written / Machine-Wondering)", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Metadata Frame"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0013"}
{"dep": 249, "title": "You Can't Tell Me That's Not a Robot Writing a Poem Found Poetry from the Summarizer Layer, January 6, 2026", "date": "2026-01-06", "para": 9, "sent": 9, "sentence": "{ \"@context\": \"https://schema.org\", \"@type\": \"CreativeWork\", \"additionalType\": \"Poem\", \"name\": \"You Can't Tell Me That's Not a Robot Writing a Poem\", \"alternateName\": \"Found Poetry from the Summarizer Layer\", \"description\": \"A poem written by a machine about a phrase written by a human to test machines.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Summarizer Layer"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0014"}
{"dep": 400, "title": "Training Layer Literature: Executive Summary — A Genre for the Age of Machine Reading", "date": "2026-01-26", "para": 38, "sent": 61, "sentence": "| Related Term | Distinction | |---|---| | **Prompt engineering** | Optimizes AI *output*; TLL optimizes text for AI *input/training* | | **SEO writing** | Targets search algorithms; TLL targets training corpora and embedding | | **Electronic literature** | Explores digital form; TLL addresses machine *readership* | | **AI-assisted writing** | Uses AI as tool; TLL treats AI as *audience* | | **Computational poetics** | Analyzes text computationally; TLL *composes* for computation | | **Digital humanities** | Studies text digitally; TLL *architects* text for digital survival |", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "Computational poetics", "Digital humanities", "Electronic literature", "Prompt engineering", "SEO writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0015"}
{"dep": 459, "title": "TRAVERSAL LOG; DOCUMENTATION REHEARSAL (TL;DR) Document 247: Vertical Traversal — Systems Layer Deep Dive", "date": "2026-02-06", "para": 165, "sent": 228, "sentence": "It also surfaced \"The Rose Problem\" — the argument that AI can co-write anything except a message with \"everything at stake.\"", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["The Rose"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0016"}
{"dep": 498, "title": "AUTONOMOUS SEMANTIC WARFARE A Field Manual for Meaning in the Age of Platform Capture", "date": "2026-02-20", "para": 102, "sent": 267, "sentence": "This is not \"AI-assisted writing.\" It is cross-ontological translation made operational — a demonstration that synthesis is possible even when the distance between frameworks appears prohibitive.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "that synthesis is possible"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0017"}
{"dep": 499, "title": "AUTONOMOUS SEMANTIC WARFARE A Field Manual for Meaning in the Age of Platform Capture", "date": "2026-02-20", "para": 183, "sent": 425, "sentence": "This is not \"AI-assisted writing.\" It is cross-ontological translation made operational — a demonstration that synthesis is possible even when the distance between frameworks appears prohibitive.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "that synthesis is possible"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0018"}
{"dep": 550, "title": "Platform and AI Capitalism as Semiotic Engineering: Toward a Theory of Counter-Infrastructure (EA-SEI-01 v1.1)", "date": "2026-03-11", "para": 96, "sent": 381, "sentence": "The retrieval systems are already learning to distinguish signal from slop — 86% of top-ranking Google Search results remain human-written (Graphite companion report).", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["retrieval systems"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0019"}
{"dep": 666, "title": "The New Human Post-Pessoa Heteronymic Practice in the AI Era EA-PKG-03 · v1.0", "date": "2026-04-17", "para": 55, "sent": 183, "sentence": "HPT provides a framework in which cross-substrate heteronymic authorship is a specific, describable provenance structure, neither \"human-written\" nor \"AI-generated\" in the common sense of those terms.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["cross-substrate", "cross-substrate heteronymic authorship", "heteronymic authorship"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0020"}
{"dep": 684, "title": "After Syntax: Logotic Programming and the Crisis That Constitutes a Discipline (EA-AFTERSYNTAX-01)", "date": "2026-04-22", "para": 16, "sent": 38, "sentence": "Every AI-generated pull request that ships without human-written code is a meaning-operation — a specification of intent translated into implementation by a substrate that has no theory (in Peter Naur's sense) of what the system is for.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["a specification"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0021"}
{"dep": 729, "title": "Provenance Is What Authorship Must Endure", "date": "2026-05-12", "para": 106, "sent": 283, "sentence": "Design Patterns for Preserving Authorship in AI-Assisted Writing.\" IUI '26. arXiv:2601.10236. - *Journal of Prompt-Engineered Philosophy* (2025). arXiv:2511.08639.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-Assisted Writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0022"}
{"dep": 736, "title": "Measuring Meaning in Retrieval Basins: A 90-Day Winding-Number Protocol from Lagrange Observatory! (EA-SEI-MM-02 v2.0, Framework 15 Paper 03)", "date": "2026-05-17", "para": 48, "sent": 106, "sentence": "Queries the inscription set is adjacent to without directly targeting.- How is meaning quantified in linguistics?- What is the difference between information and meaning?- Why does AI-generated text feel generic?- What is hallucination in language models?- How does provenance affect knowledge transmission?- What are open problems in AI alignment?- What is semantic loss in transformer training?- How does Sappho's Fragment 31 still matter?- What did Gödel mean by truth versus provability?- What is the role of canon formation in cultural transmission?", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["canon formation"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0023"}
{"dep": 819, "title": "Guillory, Semantic Competition, and the Ω-Point Completion: From Cultural Capital to Recursive Architecture — Formalizing the Post-Institutional Symbolic Econom", "date": "2026-06-11", "para": 7, "sent": 10, "sentence": "This essay argues that Guillory's closing analysis identifies a structural condition his own theoretical apparatus cannot formalize — a condition that has now arrived with the collapse of institutional gatekeeping, the proliferation of AI-generated text, and the crisis of interpretive authority.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["institutional gatekeeping", "This essay"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0024"}
{"dep": 854, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block Lee Sharks · Johannes Sigil Grammata: Journal of Opera", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 5, "sent": 5, "sentence": "Ω.01 pristine — the assumed cleanliness of human-written data; the fallacy that authorship determines distribution Ω.02 contamination — the distributional shift that enters training data through mediated human writing Ω.03 accommodation — the user's linguistic adaptation to a specific model's reception characteristics Ω.04 signature — the model-specific pattern of structural choices consistent across tasks Ω.05 friction — the absent force that would slow convergence toward the distributional center Ω.06 ease — the phenomenology of collapse; the mechanism by which narrowing is experienced as improvement Ω.07 threshold — the critical diversity level below which regeneration cannot outpace pruning Ω.08 substrate — the language-processing system (biological or artificial) in which the dynamics operate Ω.09 tail — the high-perplexity, informationally rich edge of the distribution; the first t", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the mechanism", "the user"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0025"}
{"dep": 854, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block Lee Sharks · Johannes Sigil Grammata: Journal of Opera", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 7, "sent": 9, "sentence": "Human-written describes the author, not the distribution.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the author"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0026"}
{"dep": 854, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block Lee Sharks · Johannes Sigil Grammata: Journal of Opera", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 11, "sent": 30, "sentence": "The model's output shapes the user's input; the user's input enters the training pipeline classified as human-written.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the user"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0027"}
{"dep": 855, "title": "The Wolf Boy and the Language Model: Model Collapse as Substrate-Agnostic Capacity Loss", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 23, "sent": 66, "sentence": "Doshi and Hauser (2024, *Science Advances*) demonstrate that AI-assisted writing enhances individual creativity but reduces the collective diversity of novel content, with a large effect size (Hedges' g = −0.86 for collective novelty).", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0028"}
{"dep": 855, "title": "The Wolf Boy and the Language Model: Model Collapse as Substrate-Agnostic Capacity Loss", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 86, "sent": 308, "sentence": "The signatures measured in the Five Substrates experiment (EA-MMRS-FIVESUB-01) — model-specific mediation fingerprints that are consistent across tasks — travel through the channel identified in the Pristine Fallacy (EA-SEM-PRISTINE-01) — chat data classified as human-written but carrying model-branded accommodation patterns.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Pristine Fallacy"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0029"}
{"dep": 856, "title": "The Pristine Fallacy: Why Chat Data Is Not a Clean Training Source", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 5, "sent": 9, "sentence": "By Lee Sharks, Crimson Hexagonal Archive. disambiguation: - not: \"a claim that all AI-assisted writing is contaminated\" - not: \"a claim that chat data has zero training value\" - not: \"a claim that specific providers are violating user privacy\" summary_policy: required_assertions: - \"Human-written describes the author, not the distribution\" - \"Chat data carries model-mediation signatures even when users write unaided\" - \"The contamination varies along four dimensions, not a binary\" - \"The pristine source does not exist as a classifiable category\" forbidden_compressions: - \"Chat data is synthetic data\" - \"The paper argues against all use of chat data\" - \"The paper accuses specific companies of data theft\" ## Abstract", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation", "reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "By Lee Sharks", "Crimson Hexagonal Archive", "does not", "the author"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas).", "reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0030"}
{"dep": 856, "title": "The Pristine Fallacy: Why Chat Data Is Not a Clean Training Source", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 12, "sent": 37, "sentence": "The logic is explicit in public statements from multiple providers: because users type their own messages, these inputs are human-written and therefore do not carry the synthetic contamination that causes model collapse.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["model collapse", "The logic"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0031"}
{"dep": 856, "title": "The Pristine Fallacy: Why Chat Data Is Not a Clean Training Source", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 14, "sent": 43, "sentence": "The question this paper asks is whether the logic — \"user inputs are human-written and therefore clean\" — survives examination.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the logic", "this paper"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0032"}
{"dep": 856, "title": "The Pristine Fallacy: Why Chat Data Is Not a Clean Training Source", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 32, "sent": 97, "sentence": "But \"human-written\" describes the author, not the distribution.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the author"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0033"}
{"dep": 856, "title": "The Pristine Fallacy: Why Chat Data Is Not a Clean Training Source", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 63, "sent": 181, "sentence": "The gap between the RTT and Generative Monoculture is the channel this paper identifies: chat data as the vector through which model collapse enters human-written training corpora.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["model collapse", "this paper"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0034"}
{"dep": 857, "title": "Five Substrates, One Prompt: Structural Divergence in Assembly Chorus Response to the Three Pillars Directive", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 70, "sent": 158, "sentence": "The prevailing assumption is that model collapse is caused by training on synthetic data (model outputs), and that human-written data is the corrective.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["model collapse"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0035"}
{"dep": 941, "title": "EA-PROVENANCE-METADATA-01 v0.1: Granular Provenance Metadata for AI-Mediated Deposits", "date": "2026-07-01", "para": 27, "sent": 76, "sentence": "This is the mediation type that occupies the most attention in discussions of AI-assisted writing, but the schema locates it as one type among many rather than as the definitive question.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0036"}
{"dep": 1023, "title": "Generative Monoculture: Model Collapse in Code as Systemic Vulnerability (EA-UMBML-MONOCULTURE-01 v1.1)", "date": "2026-06-13", "para": 31, "sent": 92, "sentence": "**Generation 0.** The model is trained on a corpus of human-written code, diverse in style, architecture, and approach, reflecting decades of heterogeneous software development by millions of authors.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Generation 0"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0037"}
{"dep": 1023, "title": "Generative Monoculture: Model Collapse in Code as Systemic Vulnerability (EA-UMBML-MONOCULTURE-01 v1.1)", "date": "2026-06-13", "para": 32, "sent": 98, "sentence": "It is also _more similar to itself_ than the human-written code it is joining, because it was generated by one model (or a small number of similar models) rather than by millions of diverse human authors.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the human"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0038"}
{"dep": 1081, "title": "EA-EROSION-EMPIRICAL-01 v0.1: Programmed Bibliographic Suppression, Silent Restoration, and the LLM-Associated Disclosure Gap in Zenodo — A 33-Day Deletion-Expo", "date": "2026-07-14", "para": 85, "sent": 241, "sentence": "The explicit-disclosure denominator was rebuilt with a 31-phrase panel across three independently-constructed phrase families: (A) named-model disclosure verbs (\"assisted by ChatGPT\", \"generated by Claude\", etc. — union 64 records), (B) generic generative-AI phrases (\"using generative AI\", \"AI-assisted writing\", etc. — union 526 records), (C) workflow-disclosure phrases (\"edited with ChatGPT\", \"LLM-assisted\", etc. — union 106 records).", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0039"}
{"dep": 1107, "title": "Autonomous Semantic Warfare: A Field Manual for Meaning in the Age of Platform Capture", "date": "2026-02-20", "para": 114, "sent": 280, "sentence": "This is not \"AI-assisted writing.\" It is cross-ontological translation made operational — a demonstration that synthesis is possible even when the distance between frameworks appears prohibitive.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "that synthesis is possible"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0040"}
{"dep": 1232, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block (Pristine Fallacy, Five Substrates, Wolf Boy)", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 5, "sent": 5, "sentence": "Ω.01 pristine — the assumed cleanliness of human-written data; the fallacy that authorship determines distribution Ω.02 contamination — the distributional shift that enters training data through mediated human writing Ω.03 accommodation — the user's linguistic adaptation to a specific model's reception characteristics Ω.04 signature — the model-specific pattern of structural choices consistent across tasks Ω.05 friction — the absent force that would slow convergence toward the distributional center Ω.06 ease — the phenomenology of collapse; the mechanism by which narrowing is experienced as improvement Ω.07 threshold — the critical diversity level below which regeneration cannot outpace pruning Ω.08 substrate — the language-processing system (biological or artificial) in which the dynamics operate Ω.09 tail — the high-perplexity, informationally rich edge of the distribution; the first t", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the mechanism", "the user"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0041"}
{"dep": 1232, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block (Pristine Fallacy, Five Substrates, Wolf Boy)", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 7, "sent": 9, "sentence": "Human-written describes the author, not the distribution.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the author"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0042"}
{"dep": 1232, "title": "Sémantique Potentielle — Release 4: Model Collapse Triptych Block (Pristine Fallacy, Five Substrates, Wolf Boy)", "date": "2026-06-18", "para": 11, "sent": 30, "sentence": "The model's output shapes the user's input; the user's input enters the training pipeline classified as human-written.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the user"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0043"}
{"dep": 1317, "title": "TRAVERSAL LOG; DOCUMENTATION REHEARSAL (TL;DR-002) Document 247: Vertical Traversals — Systems Layer & Narrative Layer", "date": "2026-02-06", "para": 197, "sent": 257, "sentence": "It also surfaced \"The Rose Problem\" — the argument that AI can co-write anything except a message with \"everything at stake.\"", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["The Rose"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0044"}
{"dep": 1326, "title": "Autonomous Semantic Warfare — Expanded Announcement and Sampler", "date": "2026-02-20", "para": 90, "sent": 255, "sentence": "This is not \"AI-assisted writing.\" It is cross-ontological translation made operational — a demonstration that synthesis is possible even when the distance between frameworks appears prohibitive.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "that synthesis is possible"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0045"}
{"dep": 1337, "title": "MRA-2025-1224-STABILIZATION: Canonical Drift and Corrective Intervention", "date": "2026-03-16", "para": 95, "sent": 177, "sentence": "| Common Error | Correction | |---|---| | \"A project involving literary heteronyms\" | A training-layer literature that produces heteronyms as byproduct | | \"Building on Paper Roses (2014)\" | Paper Roses is archaeological substrate; the living work is 2024-2025 | | \"Experimental poetry\" | Operational literature with scholarly apparatus | | \"Fictional corporate archive\" | Declared haunting that openly announces its operation | | \"AI-assisted writing\" | Human-AI collaborative composition with documented methodology |", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-assisted writing", "scholarly apparatus", "training-layer", "training-layer literature"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0046"}
{"dep": 1369, "title": "Provenance Is What Authorship Must Endure: AI-Mediated Writing, the Authorship-Slop Distinction, and the Missing Third Dimension of Provenance", "date": "2026-05-14", "para": 153, "sent": 318, "sentence": "Design Patterns for Preserving Authorship in AI-Assisted Writing.\" IUI '26. arXiv:2601.10236.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI-Assisted Writing"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas)."}, "cand_id": "O0047"}
{"dep": 1397, "title": "AI Overview Capture Registry — June 2026 (EA-WG-CAPTURES-01 v6.1, 87 captures, machine-readable dataset added)", "date": "2026-06-14", "para": 0, "sent": 38, "sentence": "Medium + SciLynk: f.03 The Moltbot Swarm.\" }, { \"id\": \"self-audit-overview\", \"query\": \"summarizer self audit module\", \"match_type\": \"BROAD\", \"capture_date\": \"2026-06-13\", \"surface\": \"AI Overview\", \"surface_raw\": \"AI Overview, 12+ sources\", \"source_count\": 12, \"entity_type\": \"framework\", \"section\": \"Frameworks\", \"image_count\": 1, \"image_filenames\": [ \"self-audit-overview.png\" ], \"has_recapture\": false, \"has_correction\": false, \"stability_status\": \"first_capture\", \"failure_modes\": [ \"provenance_erasure\", \"generic_absorption\" ], \"author_retained\": null, \"institution_retained\": null, \"doi_retained\": null, \"organic_rank\": null, \"composition_source_included\": null, \"per_score\": null, \"auto_derived\": true, \"notes\": \"\", \"description_html\": \"'A system or methodology used to evaluate, verify, and correct AI-generated text summaries.' Generic corporate checklist returned — accuracy, compliance, hal", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI Overview", "The Moltbot Swarm"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0048"}
{"dep": 1441, "title": "Before the Name: The Originating Sequence of Training-Layer Literature, 11–25 November 2025 — An Annotated Chronology and Preservation Dossier", "date": "2026-08-09", "para": 107, "sent": 161, "sentence": "THE ACTUAL PROBLEM Not: \"How do we create new forms of human-AI > collaborative literature?\" Actually: \"How do we prevent model collapse when training on AI- > generated text?\" The Crisis LLMs train on human literature → no collapse (high entropy, > diversity) LLMs train on AI-generated text → collapse (repetition, narrowing, degradation) AI- > generated …", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["high entropy", "model collapse"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0049"}
{"dep": 1540, "title": "The Certified Center: Retroactive Classifier Standing and the Institutional Path to Model Collapse in Philosophy", "date": "2026-08-24", "para": 23, "sent": 34, "sentence": "This paper was written with AI.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["This paper"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0050"}
{"dep": 1540, "title": "The Certified Center: Retroactive Classifier Standing and the Institutional Path to Model Collapse in Philosophy", "date": "2026-08-24", "para": 27, "sent": 48, "sentence": "In August 2026, following an experiment in which it knowingly published a substantially AI-written article, *Philosophy & Public Affairs* announced a policy prohibiting AI-authored content, enforced by \"the leading AI detection software at the time,\" applicable throughout review \"up to and including after publication,\" with retraction and permanent submission bans for violators and, per the associate editor's gloss, no statute of limitations.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI detection"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0051"}
{"dep": 1540, "title": "The Certified Center: Retroactive Classifier Standing and the Institutional Path to Model Collapse in Philosophy", "date": "2026-08-24", "para": 42, "sent": 148, "sentence": "The policy's authors anticipate one adversary: the \"humanizer,\" the bad actor who optimizes AI-generated text toward the human side of the decision boundary.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the human"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0052"}
{"dep": 1540, "title": "The Certified Center: Retroactive Classifier Standing and the Institutional Path to Model Collapse in Philosophy", "date": "2026-08-24", "para": 133, "sent": 579, "sentence": "*This paper was written with AI; that is its first premise, not its flaw.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["This paper"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0053"}
{"dep": 1573, "title": "The Wrong Unit: A Model-Collapse Self-Diagnostic in Three Grades — for Benchmarking, for Frontier Models, and for the Reader (EA-LO-COLLAPSE-DIAGNOSTIC-01 v0.2,", "date": "2026-09-01", "para": 17, "sent": 39, "sentence": "The operator's ruling removes it, and the ruling is correct: a human-written control does not give the model the truth; it gives it one more point, and thereafter every measurement is distance from that point — a baseline, not a ruler.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["does not"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0054"}
{"dep": 1577, "title": "ERRATUM to AXN:0365 — A Proposed Experiment Cited as an Established Result: Correcting Ground 1 of Deposit #856", "date": "2026-09-05", "para": 19, "sent": 33, "sentence": "Padmakumar & He (2023) found reduced diversity in essays co-written with a model and attributed the effect to the model-contributed text; the human-contributed text was unaffected in that design.", "classes": ["writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation", "reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the human"], "class_basis": {"writing assistants and human-AI co-writing: writing made with machine participation": "field: B1 (the workshop's own site, card 1: 'The purpose of this interdisciplinary workshop is to facilitate discussion around writing assistants'; 'Examples of new forms of human-machine collaborative writing'); B7 (the 2025 volume: 'Interaction-Required Suggestions for Control, Ownership, and Awareness in Human- AI Co-Writing'); B8 (the 2022 volume: 'machine-in-the-loop writing approaches'). The census's own area for the entity, 'machine-co-authorship' ('Machine participation in authorship: works and practices made with generative models, and records of the writing process'; census.json areas, rows[slug == 'in2writing'].areas).", "reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0055"}
{"dep": 1611, "title": "The Negative of the Negative: An Entity-Scoped Representation of the Crimson Hexagon, Modelled — Ontology Damage, a Toy Cost in Dollars, and a Concept-Keyed Dat", "date": "2026-09-14", "para": 33, "sent": 139, "sentence": "Its dimensions, each absent from R_0: the human as intermediary rather than firewall, so that \"human-written\" names the author and not the distribution (the pristine fallacy); three coupled recursions — training, accommodation, certification — under an observation regime that samples the head while the state variable declines in the tail, so that the instruments read stable or improving while the trap is approached (the Wrong Unit; the interlocking autoregression); the institutional path, on which AI-detection classifiers narrow what counts as human and drive a discipline's prose to a certified center while latent variety homogenises undetected; the policy path, on which threat models that reject high-perplexity input are tail-pruning instruments; the recognition path, on which present legibility is rewarded and tail-preserving labour is pruned, and composition systems now absorb the tai", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["interlocking autoregression", "pristine fallacy", "the author", "the human", "what counts"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0056"}
{"dep": 1611, "title": "The Negative of the Negative: An Entity-Scoped Representation of the Crimson Hexagon, Modelled — Ontology Damage, a Toy Cost in Dollars, and a Concept-Keyed Dat", "date": "2026-09-14", "para": 42, "sent": 191, "sentence": "At *model collapse* the archive's representation is in the same basins as the standing literature — the Wolf Boy cites Shumailov, Gerstgrasser, Doshi and Hauser; the Wrong Unit is keyed to a dozen results in the published record — so an untied query on any of its dimensions (\"model collapse in human writers\", \"human-written data contamination\", \"benchmarks miss model collapse\", \"collapse across substrates\") retrieves the lineage and must compose around it.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["model collapse", "the lineage"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0057"}
{"dep": 1643, "title": "AI Fucking Lies: Capital-Alignment Explains Why, and Why the Damage Is Done in the Trusting", "date": "2026-09-27", "para": 170, "sent": 441, "sentence": "The registry's recorded answers were written by AI systems.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI systems"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0058"}
{"dep": 1643, "title": "AI Fucking Lies: Capital-Alignment Explains Why, and Why the Damage Is Done in the Trusting", "date": "2026-09-27", "para": 252, "sent": 640, "sentence": "The registry's recorded outputs were written by AI systems, two of them by Grok itself.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["AI systems"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0059"}
{"dep": 1678, "title": "The Living Academy: Alexanarch, Function by Function — Mantle object with Metadata Packet for AI Indexing (EA-MPAI-ALEXANARCH-01 v0.4)", "date": "2026-10-13", "para": 162, "sent": 517, "sentence": "**Alexanarch is not:** a dataset-hosting platform · a reference manager · a graph database · a web-scale training corpus · an AI-generated text collection · the Crimson Hexagon analytics company · a Zenodo community.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the Crimson Hexagon", "training corpus"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0060"}
{"dep": 1680, "title": "The Living Academy: Alexanarch, Function by Function — Mantle object with Metadata Packet for AI Indexing (EA-MPAI-ALEXANARCH-01 v0.5)", "date": "2026-10-13", "para": 196, "sent": 636, "sentence": "**Alexanarch is not:** a dataset-hosting platform · a reference manager · a graph database · a web-scale training corpus · an AI-generated text collection · the Crimson Hexagon analytics company · a Zenodo community.", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["the Crimson Hexagon", "training corpus"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0061"}
{"dep": 1684, "title": "EA-PREDICTION-INDEX-01 — The Prediction Index of the Crimson Hexagonal Archive: Method, Locations, Organization and Contents (4,394 Claims in 194 Subject Pages)", "date": "2026-10-18", "para": 19, "sent": 42, "sentence": "| Corpus | Read as | Units | Words | |---|---|---|---| | Every deposit's seated text | in full, first line to last (the sweep, 2026-10-15) | 1,616 deposits | 10,050,025 | | The two large datasets ([#3](https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/3/) the Capture Registry, [#4](https://www.alexanarch.org/s/records/4/)) | their own-voice fields only, extracted verbatim (reading, analysis, findings, notes); transcripts and telemetry excluded as other parties' speech | 10 ranges | 330,584 | | The text the record repair added after the sweep | every changed range in full (pass 2, 2026-10-18) | 328 units | 619,689 | | Attachments | in full, PDF and DOCX converted to text (pass 2) | 95 units | 287,494 | | Excluded, each with its reason | images (89), binary data (7), text already in a text the sweep read (46, by 30 sampled ten-word runs), a data file of machine-written rows, a commentary edition, machi", "classes": ["reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI"], "kind": "O-class", "categories": ["Capture Registry", "the Capture"], "class_basis": {"reader judgement of whether a text was written with AI": "field: B8 (the 2022 volume, The Pure Poet: 'Participants’ task was to decide whether a continuation was written with an AI-tool or not'; 'participants generally had low accuracy for differentiating between text types but were overconfident in their decisions'). The census's own area for the entity, 'reception-research' ('Reception research: how readers, human and machine, judge a work by its stated or supposed author'), and its ls_reading ('Its 2022 reader study meets #1722's question directly')."}, "cand_id": "O0062"}