Collaborative studies are opportunities to test control strategies in live work systems: what works, what needs improving, and what more needs to be learned. A study can run alongside an AI pilot, inside a deployed workflow, or on the framework itself.
The research opportunity
HAOP is deposited, versioned, and citable, and its measures are candidates awaiting empirical work. Thesis-scale questions are open: whether ARECC finds what conventional assessment misses, whether the diagnostic reads repeat across teams, how Verification Overrun prevalence can be measured in the field, and how the work-as-imagined gap behaves under AI adoption. I share protocols and instruments, and independent results are welcome whether or not they favor the framework. AI governance is a study area of its own: whether governance policies and oversight programs translate into functional controls at the consequential transitions they claim to govern.
Show me where it breaks
Challenge a mechanism or tell me what the tools miss. I read every message. Exchanges that sharpen the framework publish, with permission, in the correspondence record.
What you can work with
- Deposited definitions. Fixed, citable operationalizations: every construct resolves to a versioned DOI, so a claim can be tested against exact text.
- The four diagnostic questions. Verification Requirement against Verification Capacity at a named workflow position and operating condition.
- The scope screen. Two conditions decide whether a situation is a verification point in a work system at all.
- Workflow Profile states. Covered, Uncovered, and Overrun as a coding scheme for consequential transitions.
- Hazard prevalence. The condition-level measure HAOP proposes in place of incident rates, with candidate metrics in the white paper.
- The True Function Diagnostic. A structured elicitation instrument that runs browser-local in field settings.
What exists to study
- White paper, Revision 6.0.1 (published) – the integrated framework. Version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22072938.
- Verification Overrun, Version 2.2 – the flagship hazard condition. Version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22181307.
- Preventing Correction Collapse, Version 2.0 – workflow-level recursive information degradation. Version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22181770.
- Human-in-the-Design, Version 1.1 – the design obligations: Provision, Preservation, Placement. Version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21633748.
- True Function Diagnostic – the free entry instrument, runs in the browser, nothing transmitted.
The full record, with concept DOIs that always resolve to the latest versions, is on the research page.