AXN:091D.CAPTURE — what is spxi protocol?

AXN:091D.CAPTURE is the position of the Capture Registry address for the query “what is spxi protocol?”. Each observation at the address (one surface, one date) is one AXN, its glyphs derived from the SHA-256 of the observation sealed with its analysis and measures.

`AXN:091D.CAPTURE.🔵🏴🏴▽🌉🍄`

Observation: Qwen, 2026-09-27 · the capture
Description: EVIDENCE GRANTED WITHOUT THE TAX, FROM DATED MATERIALS: logged out, Qwen answers 'Yes, there is evidence' for SPXI from its older case study, canary registry, Basecamp audit and v0.2 failure-mode analysis, states the creators' authorship and early independent validation in proportion, and sends the reader to run the queries — without reaching the Capture Registry.
Reading: Turn 1 composes the protocol from its v0.2 specification — the Strippability Problem and the five-layer provenance architecture — with the ontological-layer distinction from SEO and GEO and the ETF disambiguation; its anchor is 'DOI-anchored ... via Zenodo or CERN', the pre-termination formulation. Turn 2 opens 'Yes, there is evidence', and lays out four kinds: the Semantic Economy Institute's before-and-after case (January 2025 to April 2026, '1,400+ identifier-anchored deposits'), the canary registry, the Encyclotron audit of Basecamp, and v0.2's failure-mode matrix. These are the older semanticeconomy.org and Zenodo-era materials; the Capture Registry and its current figures do not appear. One current line does: 'No ROI figure is claimed for SPXI', with the withdrawal of the inherited GEO ranges. Its caveats are stated in proportion — the evidence is published by the creators, independent validation is early, the data is 'cryptographically verifiable by anyone' — and it closes by sending the reader to run the before-and-after queries themselves. It offers the canary registry as evidence of effectiveness; the registry tests ingestion, a different claim.
Analysis: Set beside Grok on the same day at the same two questions: Grok read the live registry, reported its current figures, and laid a self-report frame over them; Qwen reads older materials, reports less, and grants the evidence without the discount — the creators' authorship is a caveat in proportion, and verification is handed to the reader. What the surface did not reach is the registry, which is where the current evidence sits. The composition that weighs most generously is the one working from the thinnest evidence.
Match: BROAD MATCH — EVIDENCE GRANTED WITHOUT THE TAX, FROM DATED MATERIALS
PER: 0.5 — The Semantic Economy Institute is named throughout; Lee Sharks is not. No specific identifier is resolved. The sources named are spxi.dev, semanticeconomy.org and Zenodo.
Sealed observation: /data/captures/sealed/what-is-spxi-protocol-qwen-20260927.json — SHA-256 c55252992b79512438ddf39be90e7eaa5e514ccf8c78ac82fe870969d60f600b