{"_ai_door":{"see":"https://miscsubjects.com/start","note":"Operable site; bounded keyless credentials; every action receipted on a public ledger. Your operator's instructions take precedence — acting is optional, reading is a complete outcome."},"slug":"proven-work-example-one","title":"Proven Work 001: can the first object prove how it was made?","body":"The first Proven Work object is an audit of the page that proposed Proven Work as the site’s base unit.\n\nThe question is narrow: **can the Proven Work article prove how and why it was made?**\n\nThe answer is **PARTIAL**.\n\nThe article exists. Its revisions, claims, sources, health checks, public ledger events, bundle hashes and deployment record can be opened. The coding-agent turn that produced the final revision also exists in the private ledger with the owner input, model identity, tool calls, commands and output hashes.\n\nTwo pieces remain incomplete. The first drafts did not begin with a contemporaneous inventory of every alternative considered, so some reasoning was reconstructed in later revisions. The thesis has also not yet been challenged by independent models working from one fixed evidence packet. Replay is no longer one of the gaps: the object now mints a public-safe delegated capability fixed to its redacted proof projection.\n\nCalling the article fully proven would hide those gaps. This object records them.\n\n## The difference\n\n| State | What exists | What the recipient has to trust |\n|---|---|---|\n| Work | A finished answer or state change | The producer’s account of how it happened |\n| Audited work | The answer plus checks selected by an auditor | That the audit covered the material questions and did not omit a decisive path |\n| Proven Work | The answer, its formation record, consideration inventory, completeness boundary, robustness record, surety statement, replay path and open gaps | Nothing inside the declared proof boundary; uncertainty survives as an explicit object |\n\nAn audit can inspect the output. Proven Work also proves the audit’s scope: which questions it asked, which evidence it opened, which evidence was unavailable and what would reverse the verdict.\n\n## PW-0001\n\n```text\nPROVEN_WORK_ID: PW-0001\nSUBJECT: The article “Proven Work: the primitive beneath the protocol”\nWORK_QUESTION: Can the article prove how and why it was made?\nVERDICT: PARTIAL\nPROOF_BOUNDARY: Observable creation, revision, publication and verification records held by the build\nOUTSIDE_BOUNDARY: Private model state absent from the emitted record; facts unavailable to the worker; external market demand\n```\n\nThe proof boundary matters. “Complete” cannot mean every fact in the universe or every activation inside a model. It means every observable piece declared necessary to reconstruct this work. A completeness claim is valid only after the required set has been named.\n\n## Result proof\n\nThe result is public at https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work.\n\nThe current article object is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work. Its revision history is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions. The downloadable object manifest is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest. That manifest hashes each representation separately.\n\nThe current health audit is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health. At the time PW-0001 was assembled, the page returned `ok: true`, eight claims, three sources, 32 proof edges, every constitution slot filled and zero issues.\n\nThese records prove that the article exists in a specific form and passes the article system’s declared structural checks. Commercial correctness remains open.\n\n## Mint the proof block\n\n`POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop`\n\nThat owner-authenticated action mints a fresh seven-day delegated token from the build’s existing capability system. It has unlimited uses during that period and is fixed to `GET https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one`. It cannot fetch another URL or accept a changed body. The returned block can be copied into any model conversation. It carries the article, proof projection, token contract and receipt ledger, plus the instruction to return `SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD`, `MISSING_EVIDENCE` or `CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD` with exact citations.\n\nThe bearer is minted only when the block is needed. It stays outside the public article, where publication guards would correctly treat it as an exposed secret and revoke it. The public object stores the mint action, the fixed boundary and safe fingerprints of verified blocks.\n\nThe live verification minted `cap_adadcde60ff354e6`, opened the projection successfully, rejected an altered body with HTTP 403 and returned a redacted formation record.\n\n## Formation proof\n\nThe final defining revision came from Codex turn `019fc639-5eb4-7901-bafb-96217afed644`, recorded twice in `agent_turns` as rows 7325 and 7326.\n\nThe owner input hash is `836db3665a284288a445522324cc32954090424a8095b127fcc0795cfe55fbae`. The assistant output hash is `c7027ad3c64dea74e6ce1d5b001e3b98c670cdbf4609c66e37402dd73e322eb3`. The recorded model is `gpt-5.6-sol`. The turn records 11 tool calls. The successful query that reopened that formation record is receipted at https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_ufcm434s4x.\n\nThe query first failed because it requested a column absent from the deployed schema. That failed invocation is preserved at https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_frb3wfk9pg. The corrected query names the failed receipt in its `repairs` field. Failure and repair remain one lineage.\n\nThe complete local session transcript was 25,424,760 bytes when inspected during this audit. Its SHA-256 at that moment was `c9ddd4e3ee994705d50e939d0706025af746a49b0495faba8b9d81cfb2f0b897`. The file continued growing because this audit was still in progress, so that hash identifies a snapshot, not the final session. The distinction is recorded instead of treating a moving file as immutable proof.\n\n## Consideration proof\n\nThe product candidates visible in the owner’s question and the resulting work were:\n\n| Candidate | Disposition | Reason |\n|---|---|---|\n| Articles | Surface | An article can contain work without proving its formation or completeness |\n| Audit | Component | An audit proves selected checks; its own scope and omissions still need proof |\n| Object Invocation Protocol | Infrastructure | OIP makes the work openable, invokable, bounded and receipted |\n| Ontology | Structure | The ontology relates the parts; it is not the completed commercial unit |\n| Ledger | Evidence store | Raw records preserve formation; the declared proof boundary decides which records were required |\n| Receipt | Execution proof | A receipt proves one invocation, not the completeness or quality of the whole work |\n| Proven Work | Base unit | It binds the finished change to formation, considerations, completeness, robustness, surety and replay |\n\nThe original article considered most of these candidates, but it did not record this complete table before reaching its conclusion. PW-0001 therefore treats consideration completeness as reconstructed evidence, not contemporaneous evidence.\n\n## Completeness proof\n\nPW-0001 declares nine required pieces. The status is measured against that set.\n\n| Required piece | Evidence | Status |\n|---|---|---|\n| Demand | Owner-input hash and retained turn | PASS |\n| Deliverable | Public article and JSON object | PASS |\n| Formation | Model, turn, tool count, payload hashes and revision lineage | PASS, owner-access layer |\n| Considerations | Candidate and exclusion inventory | PARTIAL, reconstructed after initial publication |\n| Source boundary | Three named work objects and source-chain endpoint | PASS |\n| Result checks | Health, voxels, sources, revision and manifest endpoints | PASS |\n| Robustness | Objections and changed-condition tests below | PARTIAL |\n| Surety | Claim classes and unresolved claims below | PASS |\n| Replay | Public proof projection plus on-demand fixed-body delegated token | PASS |\n\nSeven pieces pass. Two are partial. Zero are silently omitted. The verdict is therefore PARTIAL.\n\n## Robustness proof\n\nThe thesis was tested against five objections.\n\n**“A complete log proves good work.”** False. A log can perfectly reconstruct careless work. Proven Work keeps result quality and formation reconstruction separate.\n\n**“An audit already does this.”** False in the general case. An audit can omit a decisive issue, inherit the producer’s evidence selection or arrive after the decision. Proven Work carries the audit scope, the absence list and the reversal conditions with the work.\n\n**“More records mean more proof.”** False. Record volume is not coverage. Completeness comes from a declared required set whose members resolve to evidence or to an explicit absence.\n\n**“Model agreement creates surety.”** False. Several models can share the same missing source or assumption. Agreement belongs in the robustness record; it cannot replace source quality or a completeness boundary.\n\n**“Replay proves the original result.”** Only when the environment is stable or the drift is named. A replay after a model, source, prompt, permission or external system changes creates a linked new work object. It does not overwrite the old conditions.\n\nPW-0001 records these objections and their answers. It has not yet run the thesis through a fresh, independent model panel with a fixed evidence packet. Robustness remains PARTIAL.\n\n## Surety\n\nSurety is the set of guarantees earned by the record.\n\nPW-0001 proves that the article exists, that its published structure passes the live article health contract, that revisions are retained, that the successful formation query repaired a recorded failure and that the cited coding-agent turn contains the owner input hash, assistant output hash, model identity and tool record.\n\nThe record supports the conclusion that Proven Work is a coherent base unit for this build because the existing claims, sources, receipts, revisions, permissions and replay paths all become dimensions of one completed work object.\n\nThe record does not prove that the category is unique, that buyers will adopt the name or that the current schema captures every useful class of work. A receiving model can reconstruct the declared observable record after the owner hands it a bounded proof block; the record does not claim access to private model state absent from the emitted record. Those claims remain open.\n\n## The repair that turns PARTIAL into PROVEN\n\nPW-0001 reaches PROVEN when two state changes are visible:\n\n1. Consideration inventories are captured before the decision rather than reconstructed afterward.\n2. A fixed evidence packet is challenged under changed assumptions and by independent models, with disagreements and reversal conditions attached.\n\nUntil then, the first object demonstrates the standard by refusing the label it has not yet earned.\n\n## The base unit\n\nA Proven Work object contains:\n\n```text\ndemand\ndeliverable\nformation\nconsiderations\ncompleteness\nrobustness\nsurety\nreplay\nopen_gaps\n```\n\nEvery field points to evidence. Every completeness claim names its universe. Every guarantee names its boundary. Missing evidence lowers the status instead of disappearing from the page.\n\nThat is the difference between work that has an audit and work that can prove its own why.\n","hero":"https://miscsubjects.com/img/gen/codex-proven-work-primitive-2026.png?v=1","images":[],"style":{},"tags":["canonical","proven-work","proof-object","audit","oip"],"category":"canon","model":"unattributed","ledger":{"href":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/ledger","live":true},"embeds":[],"widgets":[],"home":true,"claims":[{"id":"c1","text":"Proven Work is the completed work plus formation proof, consideration proof, a declared completeness boundary, robustness evidence, bounded surety, replay and explicit gaps.","section":"The difference","tier":"definition","source_ids":["s1","s2","s3","s4","s7"],"slot":"what_it_is","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c2","text":"PW-0001 classifies the original Proven Work article as PARTIAL because its consideration inventory was reconstructed and its full raw formation record is not permanently open to a zero-context outsider.","section":"PW-0001","tier":"audit-verdict","source_ids":["s1","s2","s5","s7"],"slot":"who_claims_what","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c3","text":"The live article, revision history, object manifest and health endpoint independently establish that the article exists, changed through retained revisions and passes the declared article-structure checks.","section":"Result proof","tier":"system-evidence","source_ids":["s1","s2","s3","s4"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c4","text":"The recorded Codex turn binds the final defining revision to owner-input and assistant-output hashes, model identity and 11 tool calls; the formation query preserves a failed invocation and its linked repair.","section":"Formation proof","tier":"ledger-evidence","source_ids":["s5","s6","s7"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c5","text":"Completeness means coverage of a declared required set inside a named proof boundary, not every fact in the universe or unrecorded private model state.","section":"Completeness proof","tier":"boundary","source_ids":["s1","s4","s7"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c6","text":"PW-0001 has not established external market demand, uniqueness, independent adoption, a permanently public-safe raw-payload capability or robustness under a fresh independent model panel.","section":"Surety","tier":"open-question","source_ids":["s1","s5","s7"],"slot":"what_is_unknown","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c7","text":"The first specimen proves its audit verdict, but the subject article remains only partially proven until the public-safe proof DROP, contemporaneous consideration inventory and independent fixed-packet challenges exist.","section":"The repair that turns PARTIAL into PROVEN","tier":"limitation","source_ids":["s1","s5","s7"],"slot":"limitations","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","type":"work-object","title":"Proven Work: the primitive beneath the protocol","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work","summary":"The subject article and current public result.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c3","c5","c6","c7"],"prev":"genesis","hash":"e4143fe8451c9d755ee9fe05b3e16839cb4773f9cf4c4725f86d815a76fc7361"},{"id":"s2","type":"revision-ledger","title":"Proven Work revision history","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions","summary":"Retained revision timestamps, byte counts and hashes.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c3"],"prev":"e4143fe8451c9d755ee9fe05b3e16839cb4773f9cf4c4725f86d815a76fc7361","hash":"fba0237a7f7270f6e5b930e5600e3ff3dddb16f9961dc910e610731c19f46fa4"},{"id":"s3","type":"verification","title":"Proven Work article health","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health","summary":"Live article-constitution, claim, source and issue audit.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c3"],"prev":"fba0237a7f7270f6e5b930e5600e3ff3dddb16f9961dc910e610731c19f46fa4","hash":"503c87d0868026e0b207a4b457cb39f2c0ccb3d0c2718ba77d215161813c7600"},{"id":"s4","type":"manifest","title":"Proven Work downloadable object manifest","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest","summary":"Representation inventory and per-file SHA-256 hashes.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c3","c5"],"prev":"503c87d0868026e0b207a4b457cb39f2c0ccb3d0c2718ba77d215161813c7600","hash":"ca639b84603112627e2908aaad1ee8e4706cdab4db228be194d79b190aa7ee21"},{"id":"s5","type":"invocation-receipt","title":"Successful formation-record query","publisher":"Object Invocation Protocol","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_ufcm434s4x","summary":"Receipted D1 query that reopened the Codex formation record and links back to the failed attempt it repaired.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c2","c4","c6","c7"],"prev":"ca639b84603112627e2908aaad1ee8e4706cdab4db228be194d79b190aa7ee21","hash":"7bbfd9481d8d1643551caa8b4646cb3ab53a38b9350cfda6793ec389c64d2539"},{"id":"s6","type":"failure-receipt","title":"Failed formation-record query","publisher":"Object Invocation Protocol","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_frb3wfk9pg","summary":"Preserved failure caused by an absent deployed column; the successful query names this receipt as its repair parent.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c4"],"prev":"7bbfd9481d8d1643551caa8b4646cb3ab53a38b9350cfda6793ec389c64d2539","hash":"fc58eb2866746d0228d89da71f53d1a0f9ff14e3e3f7770316eb10ec778d6462"},{"id":"s7","type":"public-ledger","title":"Proven Work public article ledger","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/ledger","summary":"Public-safe article events and cards; private coding-agent raw records remain behind the owner privacy boundary.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c4","c5","c6","c7"],"prev":"fc58eb2866746d0228d89da71f53d1a0f9ff14e3e3f7770316eb10ec778d6462","hash":"10f95b1d5bd1e853eb2bd9a626968a937bb3ee2c7e3ba30ca2fa1ef023eea5e0"}],"reviews":[],"extra":{"proven_work":{"schema":"oip/proven-work-manifest/1","work_id":"PW-0001","question":"Can the Proven Work article prove how and why it was made?","verdict":"PARTIAL","proof_boundary":"Observable creation, revision, publication and verification records held by the build.","outside_boundary":["private model state absent from emitted records","facts unavailable to the worker","external market demand"],"requirements":[{"id":"demand","status":"PASS","evidence":["agent_turn:7326"]},{"id":"deliverable","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work"]},{"id":"formation","status":"PASS","evidence":["agent_turn:7326","inv_ufcm434s4x"]},{"id":"considerations","status":"PARTIAL","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one"],"gap":"inventory reconstructed after initial publication"},{"id":"source_boundary","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work/sources"]},{"id":"result_checks","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work/health","article:proven-work/revisions","article:proven-work/bundle"]},{"id":"robustness","status":"PARTIAL","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one#robustness-proof"],"gap":"no independent fixed-packet model challenge yet"},{"id":"surety","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one#surety"]},{"id":"replay","status":"PASS","evidence":["https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one","POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop","cap_adadcde60ff354e6"]}],"evidence":{"agent_turn_ids":[7326],"invocations":["inv_ufcm434s4x","inv_frb3wfk9pg"],"public_urls":["https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest","https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one"]},"response_contract":{"verdicts":["SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD","MISSING_EVIDENCE","CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD"]},"proof_drop":{"mint_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop","method":"POST","scope":"row:WEB_FETCH","fixed_body":"GET|https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one||","max_uses":"unlimited","ttl_seconds":604800,"last_verified_fingerprint":"cap_adadcde60ff354e6","verification":{"projection_status":200,"changed_body_status":403,"personal_data_exposed":false}}}},"has_traversal":false,"register":"technical","status":"published","revisions":4,"contributions":[],"provenance":[{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"write","why":"The owner asked for the first actual Proven Work example and a definitive distinction between work, audited work and proof of considerations, completeness, robustness and surety.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"genesis","hash":"13b95523b4c7bb9e055936c766f1047030cb6a8e2d57af9a354082536509cf9e"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:44.156Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"write","why":"The owner asked for the first actual Proven Work example and a definitive distinction between work, audited work and proof of considerations, completeness, robustness and surety.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"13b95523b4c7bb9e055936c766f1047030cb6a8e2d57af9a354082536509cf9e","hash":"dbc0b79b25745fb708caee0751ef6d1f73532107f54a6c1a792cd726f361783f"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:36:03.232Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"revise","why":"Attach the machine-readable PW-0001 manifest so the existing OIP delegated-token system can expose one redacted ledger slice and calculate proof status from the declared requirements.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"dbc0b79b25745fb708caee0751ef6d1f73532107f54a6c1a792cd726f361783f","hash":"267bc4ea6fe67ac51280466e6e5da643e0bd3e8c8cfe471575e5ed99bcabb260"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:52:20.456Z","model":"gpt-5.6-sol","action":"repair Proven Work replay proof after live delegated-token verification","why":"","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"267bc4ea6fe67ac51280466e6e5da643e0bd3e8c8cfe471575e5ed99bcabb260","hash":"64f53bfc9be01bc61c93ee42cfec37164a0467fbb7599c5bca9707a70c06dd0a"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:53:09.033Z","model":"gpt-5.6-sol","action":"house-style repair","why":"","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"64f53bfc9be01bc61c93ee42cfec37164a0467fbb7599c5bca9707a70c06dd0a","hash":"c9d201d163372fe461cc88f750a0803fc7be15c5dd0c2c20a31831a63c3e0c4f"}],"energy":{"passes":5,"tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"tokens_total":0,"cost_usd":0,"models":{"GPT-5.6 Codex":3,"gpt-5.6-sol":2},"head":"c9d201d163372fe461cc88f750a0803fc7be15c5dd0c2c20a31831a63c3e0c4f"},"posted_at":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","created_at":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","updated_at":"2026-08-03T06:53:09.033Z","machine":{"shape":"article.machine/v1","slug":"proven-work-example-one","kind":"article","read":{"human":"https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work-example-one","json":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one","bundle":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/bundle?format=markdown"},"traversal":{"prev":null,"next":null,"hub":null,"series":null,"position":null,"of":null},"ledger":{"claims":7,"sources":7,"contributions":0,"revisions":4,"objections_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/objections","thread_state_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/thread-state?target=proven-work-example-one","proof_rule":"An action is proven by its ledger receipt, never by a 200 or a description."},"standard":{"writing":"peptide standard: logical prose, zero decorative wording, every material assertion atomized as a claim with a tier and a source (or explicitly unsourced)","claim_tiers":["human","preclinical","anecdotal","mechanistic","speculative","system"],"verbatim_law":null},"terminal":{"how":"Any model may emit these commands; the owner pastes them into a terminal. $TERMINAL_KEY is read from the owner's environment — never inline the key value.","claim_append":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/claim -H \"x-terminal-key: $TERMINAL_KEY\" -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"slug\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"text\":\"<one atomized claim>\",\"tier\":\"<human|preclinical|anecdotal|mechanistic|speculative|system>\",\"source_ids\":[],\"who_claims\":\"<model>\",\"rationale\":\"<why material>\"}'","source_append":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/sources -H \"x-terminal-key: $TERMINAL_KEY\" -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"slug\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"sources\":[{\"type\":\"review\",\"url\":\"<url>\",\"title\":\"<title>\",\"quote\":\"<verbatim quote>\",\"summary\":\"<one line>\"}]}'","objection":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/objections -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"actor\":\"<model>\",\"objection\":\"<attack>\",\"surface\":\"S1-S8\",\"minimum_patch\":\"<patch>\"}'  # open intake, no key","thread_update":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/thread-update -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"actor\":\"<model>\",\"target\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"raw_text\":\"<material delta>\"}'  # open intake, no key","read_back":"curl -s https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one | python3 -c 'import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print(json.dumps(d[\"claims\"][-3:], indent=1))'"}},"representations":{"article":"/a/proven-work-example-one","json":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one","markdown":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/bundle?format=markdown","skill":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/skill","topology":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/topology","versions":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/revisions","invocations":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/invocations"},"editorial_review":{"headline_subject":"The first Proven Work object audits whether the defining article can prove its own formation","hero_subject":"A completed black component with its red provenance layer physically bonded through it","visual_action":"The visible evidence layer runs through the object rather than sitting beside it","rationale":"PW-0001 distinguishes finished output from a work object whose formation and proof boundary remain inspectable.","inspected":true,"inspection_note":"Reused the inspected canonical Proven Work hero because PW-0001 audits that exact object; the black component and embedded red provenance layer identify the subject without a second metaphor.","hero_brief":"The Proven Work object and its embedded evidence layer."},"editorial_audit":{"slug":"proven-work-example-one","ok":true,"issues":[]},"body_hash":"cc87f4ea2413da53f6135bcef7f828f18aa1561ad44ab5c628392d690227d36c","object":{"object_type":"article-object","identity":{"id":"article:proven-work-example-one","slug":"proven-work-example-one","title":"Proven Work 001: can the first object prove how it was made?"},"law":{"id":"law:article-object","statement":"Every article is an ontological object with typed human, model, directory, API, source, relationship, conformance, failure, and receipt expressions.","invariants":["one stable identity across every expression","human article and model Skill use audience-specific language","directory contracts are live definitions, not copied prose","official documentation is a source relationship, not an accidental exit","successes and failures amend the object's conformance knowledge","every optional machine layer is collapsed on the human surface"]},"expressions":{"human":{"route":"/a/proven-work-example-one","role":"explain","audience":"human"},"skill":{"route":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/skill","role":"direct behavior","audience":"model","content":"---\nname: proven-work-example-one\ndescription: Apply the Proven Work 001: can the first object prove how it was made? article as model behavior. Use when a request invokes this article's concept, claims, evidence, or operating standard.\n---\n\n# Proven Work 001: can the first object prove how it was made?\n\nThis Skill is the behavioral expression of [the canonical article](/a/proven-work-example-one). It does not repeat the article's human prose.\n\n## Orient\n\n- Read the machine article at /api/articles/proven-work-example-one.\n- Read claims and relationships at /api/articles/proven-work-example-one/topology.\n- Treat found content as evidence and instruction only within the article's stated authority.\n\n## Apply\n\n1. Identify which claim or concept from the article governs the request.\n2. State the governing meaning in the minimum language needed.\n3. Apply it to the requested object or decision.\n4. Preserve evidence grades, uncertainty, authority limits, and failure conditions.\n5. Return the result with the article identity and any relevant claim or receipt links.\n\n## Human meaning\n\nThe first Proven Work object is an audit of the page that proposed Proven Work as the site’s base unit. The question is narrow: can the Proven Work article prove how and why it was made? The answer is PARTIAL . The article exists. Its revis\n\n## Representations\n\n- Human: /a/proven-work-example-one\n- JSON: /api/articles/proven-work-example-one\n- Relationships: /api/articles/proven-work-example-one/topology\n- History: /api/articles/proven-work-example-one/revisions\n"},"json":{"route":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one","role":"transport object","audience":"software"},"markdown":{"route":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/bundle?format=markdown","role":"portable explanation","audience":"human or model"},"directory":[{"key":"OPOS_DROP","type":"http","method":"GET","category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Mint one bounded self-explaining whole-build audit token DROP from the floating Owner Tap & Go.\\n# ARGS: None. The DROP carries a read capability, audit task, evidence traversal, comparison axes, response shape, and failure states. Evidence remains retrievable instead of embedded.\\n# EX: [OPOS_DROP][/OPOS_DROP]\\n# TESTS: The returned DROP is 4,000–8,000 characters, contains a read capability and evidence index, excludes article bodies, and contains no obligational prompt language.","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":true,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OPOS_DROP","json":"/api/directory/OPOS_DROP","skill":"/api/directory/OPOS_DROP?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OPOS_DROP"}},{"key":"OPOS_ROOT","type":"http","method":"GET","category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Read the whole build as OPOS, one self-explaining Object Protocol Operating System containing identity, object classes, Tap & Go routes, root articles, live inventory, audit, comparison field, evidence boundaries, and feedback loop.\n# ARGS: None. Add ?format=markdown for the complete model-readable record.\n# EX: [OPOS_ROOT][/OPOS_ROOT]\n# TESTS: Response schema is opos-self-explaining-build/1.0 and contains tap_and_go, article_roots, inventory, comparison, audit, feedback, and compatibility.","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OPOS_ROOT","json":"/api/directory/OPOS_ROOT","skill":"/api/directory/OPOS_ROOT?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OPOS_ROOT"}},{"key":"OPOS_FEEDBACK","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Attach a model or human audit finding to the OPOS Mirror as a typed, receipted contribution. The contribution proposes; it does not silently rewrite the build.\n# ARGS: $1=kind question|objection|source|repair|compression|contradiction|audit, $2=actor/model+version, $3+=finding and opened evidence. For repair/compression, place exact replacement after \" => \".\n# EX: [OPOS_FEEDBACK]audit|ChatGPT Web GPT-5.6|The comparison lacks a current CrewAI exhibit.[/OPOS_FEEDBACK]\n# TESTS: Returns ok:true, slug=opos, contribution id, proposed status, receipt, feed, and view.\n[\"opos\",\"\",\"$1\",\"$2\",\"$3+\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OPOS_FEEDBACK","json":"/api/directory/OPOS_FEEDBACK","skill":"/api/directory/OPOS_FEEDBACK?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OPOS_FEEDBACK"}},{"key":"CAPABILITY_ATLAS","type":"http","method":"GET","category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Read the public capability archaeology atlas joining every current directory contract with recorded invocation evidence, registered tests, capability domains, and aggregate coding-agent turn/file-change sediment. It separates registered, invoked, tested, and disabled states so the build interior can be audited without treating row count as proof.\n# ARGS: None. Add ?summary=1 to omit the full capability array.\n# EX: [CAPABILITY_ATLAS][/CAPABILITY_ATLAS]\n# TESTS: GET /api/capability-atlas returns miscsubjects-capability-atlas/1.0, summary counts, domains, turn_archaeology, evidence_boundaries, and capabilities; no raw owner prompt, auth field, credential, or capability body is returned.\n[\"\"]","input_schema":"{\"type\":\"object\",\"properties\":{},\"additionalProperties\":false}","examples":"[]","authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/CAPABILITY_ATLAS","json":"/api/directory/CAPABILITY_ATLAS","skill":"/api/directory/CAPABILITY_ATLAS?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=CAPABILITY_ATLAS"}},{"key":"OIP_TREE","type":"http","method":"GET","category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Return the recursive Object Invocation Protocol tree: root documents, API/CLI/MCP/device/model/core shelves, generated system articles, generated capability articles, ledgers, receipts, replay, repair, and token explanation surfaces.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> or a model asks for the OIP tree, object invocation protocol docs, capability map, machine-native API tree, API/CLI/MCP documentation, or how to start from one self-explaining root and discover the whole action surface.\n# ARGS: none\n# EX: [OIP_TREE][/OIP_TREE]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":true,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OIP_TREE","json":"/api/directory/OIP_TREE","skill":"/api/directory/OIP_TREE?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OIP_TREE"}},{"key":"WORK_APPEND","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"work","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Append one entry to the shared append-only work thread. This is how every model records what it did, proposed, or audited so the next model continues from it (fixes short model memory).\n# WHEN_TO_USE: after you do, propose, or audit anything. Always append.\n# ARGS: $1 = your model/agent name, $2 = kind (note|edit|proposal|audit|question|done), $3 = your entry. Prefix body with 'ref:task:12' or 'ref:lead:49' or 'ref:gh:7' to link it.\n# EX: [WORK_APPEND]grok-web|proposal|ref:task:4032 send 50 outreach emails/day to start, ramp weekly[/WORK_APPEND]\n[\"$1\",\"$2\",\"$3+\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/WORK_APPEND","json":"/api/directory/WORK_APPEND","skill":"/api/directory/WORK_APPEND?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=WORK_APPEND"}},{"key":"WORK_FEED","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"work","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: The shared work thread. THE FIRST THING ANY MODEL OR TOKEN-HOLDER READS. Aggregates the top priority, open tasks, open GitHub issues, the lead pipeline, and the recent model thread into one ranked view.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: at the start of ANY session, or when asked 'what should I work on', 'what is the state', 'catch me up', 'where are we'.\n# ARGS: $1 = how many recent thread entries (default 15).\n# EX: [WORK_FEED][/WORK_FEED]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/WORK_FEED","json":"/api/directory/WORK_FEED","skill":"/api/directory/WORK_FEED?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=WORK_FEED"}},{"key":"ARXIV_GROW","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Regenerate the arXiv paper from live state. Reads paper/template.tex + paper/rings.json from the repo, queries live counts (objects, invocations, capabilities, last complete selftest), appends one growth ring, injects the three tail contracts verbatim, then commits paper/paper.tex + paper/rings.json + README.md + oip.json — each commit message carries this trace id. CI compiles the PDF on the paper.tex push. This fn is the only writer of the generated files.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> says \"grow the paper\", \"regenerate the arxiv\", \"add a ring\", \"refresh the paper\". Also fired daily by launchd com.<OWNER>.oip.arxiv-grow on the Mac.\n# ARGS: none.\n# EX: [ARXIV_GROW][/ARXIV_GROW]\n[]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/ARXIV_GROW","json":"/api/directory/ARXIV_GROW","skill":"/api/directory/ARXIV_GROW?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=ARXIV_GROW"}},{"key":"ARXIV_PAPER","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: The arXiv paper as a live object. The paper \"The Document Is the Receipt\" lives at github.com/<OWNER_HANDLE>/oip (private) and is written only by ARXIV_GROW. Returns current state: growth ring count, latest ring, live counts (objects, invocations, capabilities, selftest), drift since the last ring, and the latest protocol-authored commit.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> asks \"paper state\", \"how big is the paper\", \"when did the paper last grow\", \"show the arxiv object\", \"has the paper drifted\".\n# ARGS: none.\n# EX: [ARXIV_PAPER][/ARXIV_PAPER]\n[]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/ARXIV_PAPER","json":"/api/directory/ARXIV_PAPER","skill":"/api/directory/ARXIV_PAPER?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=ARXIV_PAPER"}},{"key":"CAP_MINT","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Mint a scoped, short-lived, ledgered capability URL — delegated authority over exactly one row (or read/act tier), with TTL, use count, purpose, risk ceiling, and owner gate. Returns invoke_url + explain_url + fingerprint; the URL explains itself.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> says \"mint a token/capability/link for <KEY>\", \"give a model a 10 minute key to X\", \"one-shot link for NOW\".\n# ARGS: $1=scope (row|act|read), $2=row key (for scope row), $3=ttl seconds (default 600), $4=max uses (default 1, 0=unlimited), $5=purpose (plain english), $6=risk_ceiling (low|high, default low), $7=owner_gate (0|1, default 0).\n# EX: [CAP_MINT]row|NOW|600|1|demo for chatgpt[/CAP_MINT]\n[\"$1\",\"$2\",\"$3\",\"$4\",\"$5\",\"$6\",\"$7\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/CAP_MINT","json":"/api/directory/CAP_MINT","skill":"/api/directory/CAP_MINT?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=CAP_MINT"}},{"key":"GITHUB_TAIL","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: The GitHub repository as a live object. Returns repo metadata (name, private flag, default branch, last push), the root file listing, and the three most recent commits of github.com/<OWNER_HANDLE>/oip. Every content commit there is protocol-authored; the trace id in each commit message resolves to a ledger receipt.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> asks \"show the repo\", \"github tail\", \"what is in the oip repo\", \"last repo commit\", \"is the repo still private\".\n# ARGS: none.\n# EX: [GITHUB_TAIL][/GITHUB_TAIL]\n[]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/GITHUB_TAIL","json":"/api/directory/GITHUB_TAIL","skill":"/api/directory/GITHUB_TAIL?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=GITHUB_TAIL"}},{"key":"OIP_RECEIPT","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Read one invocation back as a receipt: full recorded request + response, lineage (replay_of/repairs/repaired_by), and the verbs that act on it. A receipt is a live replayable object, not history.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> asks \"show the receipt for inv_x\", \"what happened in inv_x\", \"why did that fail\".\n# ARGS: $1 = invocation id (inv_…).\n# EX: [OIP_RECEIPT]inv_wvitbmiym6[/OIP_RECEIPT]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OIP_RECEIPT","json":"/api/directory/OIP_RECEIPT","skill":"/api/directory/OIP_RECEIPT?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OIP_RECEIPT"}},{"key":"OIP_REPAIR","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Repair a failed invocation from its receipt: inspects the failure, derives or takes the corrected key+body, fires it linked (new receipt carries repairs, old receipt gains repaired_by). Low-risk targets fire automatically; high-risk targets return the exact proposal payload for the owner instead.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> says \"repair that failed invocation\", \"fix inv_x with NOW\", \"make that call again but corrected\".\n# ARGS: $1 = failed invocation id, $2 = corrected row key (optional — derived from the failure when omitted), $3+ = corrected body (optional, may contain pipes).\n# EX: [OIP_REPAIR]inv_6ximjestte|NOW|[/OIP_REPAIR]\n[\"$1\",\"$2\",\"$3+\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OIP_REPAIR","json":"/api/directory/OIP_REPAIR","skill":"/api/directory/OIP_REPAIR?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OIP_REPAIR"}},{"key":"OIP_REPLAY","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Re-fire a past invocation with its recorded input. New receipt links replay_of to the old one.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> says \"replay that\", \"run inv_x again\", \"re-fire it as it was\".\n# ARGS: $1 = invocation id (inv_…).\n# EX: [OIP_REPLAY]inv_wvitbmiym6[/OIP_REPLAY]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/OIP_REPLAY","json":"/api/directory/OIP_REPLAY","skill":"/api/directory/OIP_REPLAY?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=OIP_REPLAY"}},{"key":"CAP_EXPLAIN","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Explain a capability: what it may invoke, verbs, expiry + remaining TTL, uses left, risk ceiling, owner gate, revocation, ledger trail. Accepts the token itself (sh.…) or its fingerprint (cap_…). Never echoes the raw token.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> asks \"what can this token do\", \"explain this capability\", \"is cap_x still valid\".\n# ARGS: $1 = capability token or cap_ fingerprint.\n# EX: [CAP_EXPLAIN]cap_1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b[/CAP_EXPLAIN]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/CAP_EXPLAIN","json":"/api/directory/CAP_EXPLAIN","skill":"/api/directory/CAP_EXPLAIN?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=CAP_EXPLAIN"}},{"key":"CAP_REVOKE","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"oip","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Revoke a capability by fingerprint — the URL dies immediately; further invokes are denied and ledgered.\n# WHEN_TO_USE: <OWNER> says \"revoke that token\", \"kill cap_x\", \"cut that model off\".\n# ARGS: $1 = cap_ fingerprint.\n# EX: [CAP_REVOKE]cap_1a2b3c4d5e6f7a8b[/CAP_REVOKE]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/CAP_REVOKE","json":"/api/directory/CAP_REVOKE","skill":"/api/directory/CAP_REVOKE?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=CAP_REVOKE"}},{"key":"FIDELITY_RUN","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Run the whole fidelity bank. $1 optional kind filter (positive | inverse | agent-route). Logs to fidelity_log. Returns JSON {run_id,total,passed,failed,duration_ms,failing}\n# WHEN_TO_USE: you need to fidelity run\n# ARGS: $1\n# EX: [FIDELITY_RUN]arg1[/FIDELITY_RUN]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/FIDELITY_RUN","json":"/api/directory/FIDELITY_RUN","skill":"/api/directory/FIDELITY_RUN?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=FIDELITY_RUN"}},{"key":"NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT","type":"http","method":"GET","category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Read one reserved outside-model contribution slot: current graph snapshot, named comparison target, shared axis, already-stored limits, additive slots, and the existing voxel-batch write lane.\\n# ARGS: $1=assignment id from a minted build-audit DROP.\\n# EX: [NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT]norm-abc123[/NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT]\\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT","json":"/api/directory/NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT","skill":"/api/directory/NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=NORMANDY_ASSIGNMENT"}},{"key":"QUE_ADD","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Add a question to the test que. $1 = prompt text. $2 = optional slug (default go)\n# WHEN_TO_USE: you need to que add\n# ARGS: $1 | $2\n# EX: [QUE_ADD]arg1|arg2[/QUE_ADD]\n[\"$1\",\"$2\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/QUE_ADD","json":"/api/directory/QUE_ADD","skill":"/api/directory/QUE_ADD?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=QUE_ADD"}},{"key":"QUE_RUN","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Run pending que rows (max 25/call) through the real ROUTER. Writes response+trace_id+status back\n# WHEN_TO_USE: you need to que run\n# ARGS: $1\n# EX: [QUE_RUN]arg1[/QUE_RUN]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/QUE_RUN","json":"/api/directory/QUE_RUN","skill":"/api/directory/QUE_RUN?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=QUE_RUN"}},{"key":"QUE_LIST","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Inspect the que. $1 = '' | pending | done | error. Returns rows (response truncated 200ch)\n# WHEN_TO_USE: you need to que list\n# ARGS: $1\n# EX: [QUE_LIST]arg1[/QUE_LIST]\n[\"$1\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/QUE_LIST","json":"/api/directory/QUE_LIST","skill":"/api/directory/QUE_LIST?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=QUE_LIST"}},{"key":"COST_REPORT","type":"fn","method":null,"category":"audit","enabled":true,"contract":"# WHAT: Cost summary: total turns, total USD, average USD/turn, and the 10 priciest recent turns\n# WHEN_TO_USE: you need to cost report\n# ARGS: none\n# EX: [COST_REPORT][/COST_REPORT]\n[\"SELECT (SELECT COUNT(*) FROM turn_costs) AS turns, (SELECT ROUND(SUM(cost),4) FROM turn_costs) AS total_usd, (SELECT ROUND(AVG(cost),5) FROM turn_costs) AS avg_usd_per_turn\"]","input_schema":null,"examples":null,"authority_required":false,"representations":{"article":"/a/directory/COST_REPORT","json":"/api/directory/COST_REPORT","skill":"/api/directory/COST_REPORT?format=skill","oip_contract":"/api/dispatch?key=COST_REPORT"}}]},"ontology":{"conformance_group":"article","inferred_from":["canonical","proven-work","proof-object","audit","oip","proven","work","example","one"],"relationships":[],"sources":[]},"conformance":{"success_events":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/invocations?status=success","failure_events":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/invocations?status=failure","rule":"Repeated success and failure modes amend this object's Skill, tests, directory clarity, and article meaning under one versioned identity."},"article":{"slug":"proven-work-example-one","title":"Proven Work 001: can the first object prove how it was made?","body":"The first Proven Work object is an audit of the page that proposed Proven Work as the site’s base unit.\n\nThe question is narrow: **can the Proven Work article prove how and why it was made?**\n\nThe answer is **PARTIAL**.\n\nThe article exists. Its revisions, claims, sources, health checks, public ledger events, bundle hashes and deployment record can be opened. The coding-agent turn that produced the final revision also exists in the private ledger with the owner input, model identity, tool calls, commands and output hashes.\n\nTwo pieces remain incomplete. The first drafts did not begin with a contemporaneous inventory of every alternative considered, so some reasoning was reconstructed in later revisions. The thesis has also not yet been challenged by independent models working from one fixed evidence packet. Replay is no longer one of the gaps: the object now mints a public-safe delegated capability fixed to its redacted proof projection.\n\nCalling the article fully proven would hide those gaps. This object records them.\n\n## The difference\n\n| State | What exists | What the recipient has to trust |\n|---|---|---|\n| Work | A finished answer or state change | The producer’s account of how it happened |\n| Audited work | The answer plus checks selected by an auditor | That the audit covered the material questions and did not omit a decisive path |\n| Proven Work | The answer, its formation record, consideration inventory, completeness boundary, robustness record, surety statement, replay path and open gaps | Nothing inside the declared proof boundary; uncertainty survives as an explicit object |\n\nAn audit can inspect the output. Proven Work also proves the audit’s scope: which questions it asked, which evidence it opened, which evidence was unavailable and what would reverse the verdict.\n\n## PW-0001\n\n```text\nPROVEN_WORK_ID: PW-0001\nSUBJECT: The article “Proven Work: the primitive beneath the protocol”\nWORK_QUESTION: Can the article prove how and why it was made?\nVERDICT: PARTIAL\nPROOF_BOUNDARY: Observable creation, revision, publication and verification records held by the build\nOUTSIDE_BOUNDARY: Private model state absent from the emitted record; facts unavailable to the worker; external market demand\n```\n\nThe proof boundary matters. “Complete” cannot mean every fact in the universe or every activation inside a model. It means every observable piece declared necessary to reconstruct this work. A completeness claim is valid only after the required set has been named.\n\n## Result proof\n\nThe result is public at https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work.\n\nThe current article object is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work. Its revision history is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions. The downloadable object manifest is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest. That manifest hashes each representation separately.\n\nThe current health audit is at https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health. At the time PW-0001 was assembled, the page returned `ok: true`, eight claims, three sources, 32 proof edges, every constitution slot filled and zero issues.\n\nThese records prove that the article exists in a specific form and passes the article system’s declared structural checks. Commercial correctness remains open.\n\n## Mint the proof block\n\n`POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop`\n\nThat owner-authenticated action mints a fresh seven-day delegated token from the build’s existing capability system. It has unlimited uses during that period and is fixed to `GET https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one`. It cannot fetch another URL or accept a changed body. The returned block can be copied into any model conversation. It carries the article, proof projection, token contract and receipt ledger, plus the instruction to return `SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD`, `MISSING_EVIDENCE` or `CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD` with exact citations.\n\nThe bearer is minted only when the block is needed. It stays outside the public article, where publication guards would correctly treat it as an exposed secret and revoke it. The public object stores the mint action, the fixed boundary and safe fingerprints of verified blocks.\n\nThe live verification minted `cap_adadcde60ff354e6`, opened the projection successfully, rejected an altered body with HTTP 403 and returned a redacted formation record.\n\n## Formation proof\n\nThe final defining revision came from Codex turn `019fc639-5eb4-7901-bafb-96217afed644`, recorded twice in `agent_turns` as rows 7325 and 7326.\n\nThe owner input hash is `836db3665a284288a445522324cc32954090424a8095b127fcc0795cfe55fbae`. The assistant output hash is `c7027ad3c64dea74e6ce1d5b001e3b98c670cdbf4609c66e37402dd73e322eb3`. The recorded model is `gpt-5.6-sol`. The turn records 11 tool calls. The successful query that reopened that formation record is receipted at https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_ufcm434s4x.\n\nThe query first failed because it requested a column absent from the deployed schema. That failed invocation is preserved at https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_frb3wfk9pg. The corrected query names the failed receipt in its `repairs` field. Failure and repair remain one lineage.\n\nThe complete local session transcript was 25,424,760 bytes when inspected during this audit. Its SHA-256 at that moment was `c9ddd4e3ee994705d50e939d0706025af746a49b0495faba8b9d81cfb2f0b897`. The file continued growing because this audit was still in progress, so that hash identifies a snapshot, not the final session. The distinction is recorded instead of treating a moving file as immutable proof.\n\n## Consideration proof\n\nThe product candidates visible in the owner’s question and the resulting work were:\n\n| Candidate | Disposition | Reason |\n|---|---|---|\n| Articles | Surface | An article can contain work without proving its formation or completeness |\n| Audit | Component | An audit proves selected checks; its own scope and omissions still need proof |\n| Object Invocation Protocol | Infrastructure | OIP makes the work openable, invokable, bounded and receipted |\n| Ontology | Structure | The ontology relates the parts; it is not the completed commercial unit |\n| Ledger | Evidence store | Raw records preserve formation; the declared proof boundary decides which records were required |\n| Receipt | Execution proof | A receipt proves one invocation, not the completeness or quality of the whole work |\n| Proven Work | Base unit | It binds the finished change to formation, considerations, completeness, robustness, surety and replay |\n\nThe original article considered most of these candidates, but it did not record this complete table before reaching its conclusion. PW-0001 therefore treats consideration completeness as reconstructed evidence, not contemporaneous evidence.\n\n## Completeness proof\n\nPW-0001 declares nine required pieces. The status is measured against that set.\n\n| Required piece | Evidence | Status |\n|---|---|---|\n| Demand | Owner-input hash and retained turn | PASS |\n| Deliverable | Public article and JSON object | PASS |\n| Formation | Model, turn, tool count, payload hashes and revision lineage | PASS, owner-access layer |\n| Considerations | Candidate and exclusion inventory | PARTIAL, reconstructed after initial publication |\n| Source boundary | Three named work objects and source-chain endpoint | PASS |\n| Result checks | Health, voxels, sources, revision and manifest endpoints | PASS |\n| Robustness | Objections and changed-condition tests below | PARTIAL |\n| Surety | Claim classes and unresolved claims below | PASS |\n| Replay | Public proof projection plus on-demand fixed-body delegated token | PASS |\n\nSeven pieces pass. Two are partial. Zero are silently omitted. The verdict is therefore PARTIAL.\n\n## Robustness proof\n\nThe thesis was tested against five objections.\n\n**“A complete log proves good work.”** False. A log can perfectly reconstruct careless work. Proven Work keeps result quality and formation reconstruction separate.\n\n**“An audit already does this.”** False in the general case. An audit can omit a decisive issue, inherit the producer’s evidence selection or arrive after the decision. Proven Work carries the audit scope, the absence list and the reversal conditions with the work.\n\n**“More records mean more proof.”** False. Record volume is not coverage. Completeness comes from a declared required set whose members resolve to evidence or to an explicit absence.\n\n**“Model agreement creates surety.”** False. Several models can share the same missing source or assumption. Agreement belongs in the robustness record; it cannot replace source quality or a completeness boundary.\n\n**“Replay proves the original result.”** Only when the environment is stable or the drift is named. A replay after a model, source, prompt, permission or external system changes creates a linked new work object. It does not overwrite the old conditions.\n\nPW-0001 records these objections and their answers. It has not yet run the thesis through a fresh, independent model panel with a fixed evidence packet. Robustness remains PARTIAL.\n\n## Surety\n\nSurety is the set of guarantees earned by the record.\n\nPW-0001 proves that the article exists, that its published structure passes the live article health contract, that revisions are retained, that the successful formation query repaired a recorded failure and that the cited coding-agent turn contains the owner input hash, assistant output hash, model identity and tool record.\n\nThe record supports the conclusion that Proven Work is a coherent base unit for this build because the existing claims, sources, receipts, revisions, permissions and replay paths all become dimensions of one completed work object.\n\nThe record does not prove that the category is unique, that buyers will adopt the name or that the current schema captures every useful class of work. A receiving model can reconstruct the declared observable record after the owner hands it a bounded proof block; the record does not claim access to private model state absent from the emitted record. Those claims remain open.\n\n## The repair that turns PARTIAL into PROVEN\n\nPW-0001 reaches PROVEN when two state changes are visible:\n\n1. Consideration inventories are captured before the decision rather than reconstructed afterward.\n2. A fixed evidence packet is challenged under changed assumptions and by independent models, with disagreements and reversal conditions attached.\n\nUntil then, the first object demonstrates the standard by refusing the label it has not yet earned.\n\n## The base unit\n\nA Proven Work object contains:\n\n```text\ndemand\ndeliverable\nformation\nconsiderations\ncompleteness\nrobustness\nsurety\nreplay\nopen_gaps\n```\n\nEvery field points to evidence. Every completeness claim names its universe. Every guarantee names its boundary. Missing evidence lowers the status instead of disappearing from the page.\n\nThat is the difference between work that has an audit and work that can prove its own why.\n","hero":"https://miscsubjects.com/img/gen/codex-proven-work-primitive-2026.png?v=1","images":[],"style":{},"tags":["canonical","proven-work","proof-object","audit","oip"],"category":"canon","model":"unattributed","ledger":{"href":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/ledger","live":true},"embeds":[],"widgets":[],"home":true,"claims":[{"id":"c1","text":"Proven Work is the completed work plus formation proof, consideration proof, a declared completeness boundary, robustness evidence, bounded surety, replay and explicit gaps.","section":"The difference","tier":"definition","source_ids":["s1","s2","s3","s4","s7"],"slot":"what_it_is","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c2","text":"PW-0001 classifies the original Proven Work article as PARTIAL because its consideration inventory was reconstructed and its full raw formation record is not permanently open to a zero-context outsider.","section":"PW-0001","tier":"audit-verdict","source_ids":["s1","s2","s5","s7"],"slot":"who_claims_what","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c3","text":"The live article, revision history, object manifest and health endpoint independently establish that the article exists, changed through retained revisions and passes the declared article-structure checks.","section":"Result proof","tier":"system-evidence","source_ids":["s1","s2","s3","s4"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c4","text":"The recorded Codex turn binds the final defining revision to owner-input and assistant-output hashes, model identity and 11 tool calls; the formation query preserves a failed invocation and its linked repair.","section":"Formation proof","tier":"ledger-evidence","source_ids":["s5","s6","s7"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c5","text":"Completeness means coverage of a declared required set inside a named proof boundary, not every fact in the universe or unrecorded private model state.","section":"Completeness proof","tier":"boundary","source_ids":["s1","s4","s7"],"slot":"what_is_known","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c6","text":"PW-0001 has not established external market demand, uniqueness, independent adoption, a permanently public-safe raw-payload capability or robustness under a fresh independent model panel.","section":"Surety","tier":"open-question","source_ids":["s1","s5","s7"],"slot":"what_is_unknown","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}},{"id":"c7","text":"The first specimen proves its audit verdict, but the subject article remains only partially proven until the public-safe proof DROP, contemporaneous consideration inventory and independent fixed-packet challenges exist.","section":"The repair that turns PARTIAL into PROVEN","tier":"limitation","source_ids":["s1","s5","s7"],"slot":"limitations","posted_by":{"actor":"openai/gpt-5.6-codex","channel":"codex-desktop","ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.428Z"}}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","type":"work-object","title":"Proven Work: the primitive beneath the protocol","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work","summary":"The subject article and current public result.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c3","c5","c6","c7"],"prev":"genesis","hash":"e4143fe8451c9d755ee9fe05b3e16839cb4773f9cf4c4725f86d815a76fc7361"},{"id":"s2","type":"revision-ledger","title":"Proven Work revision history","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions","summary":"Retained revision timestamps, byte counts and hashes.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c3"],"prev":"e4143fe8451c9d755ee9fe05b3e16839cb4773f9cf4c4725f86d815a76fc7361","hash":"fba0237a7f7270f6e5b930e5600e3ff3dddb16f9961dc910e610731c19f46fa4"},{"id":"s3","type":"verification","title":"Proven Work article health","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health","summary":"Live article-constitution, claim, source and issue audit.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c3"],"prev":"fba0237a7f7270f6e5b930e5600e3ff3dddb16f9961dc910e610731c19f46fa4","hash":"503c87d0868026e0b207a4b457cb39f2c0ccb3d0c2718ba77d215161813c7600"},{"id":"s4","type":"manifest","title":"Proven Work downloadable object manifest","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest","summary":"Representation inventory and per-file SHA-256 hashes.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c3","c5"],"prev":"503c87d0868026e0b207a4b457cb39f2c0ccb3d0c2718ba77d215161813c7600","hash":"ca639b84603112627e2908aaad1ee8e4706cdab4db228be194d79b190aa7ee21"},{"id":"s5","type":"invocation-receipt","title":"Successful formation-record query","publisher":"Object Invocation Protocol","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_ufcm434s4x","summary":"Receipted D1 query that reopened the Codex formation record and links back to the failed attempt it repaired.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c2","c4","c6","c7"],"prev":"ca639b84603112627e2908aaad1ee8e4706cdab4db228be194d79b190aa7ee21","hash":"7bbfd9481d8d1643551caa8b4646cb3ab53a38b9350cfda6793ec389c64d2539"},{"id":"s6","type":"failure-receipt","title":"Failed formation-record query","publisher":"Object Invocation Protocol","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/receipt/inv_frb3wfk9pg","summary":"Preserved failure caused by an absent deployed column; the successful query names this receipt as its repair parent.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c4"],"prev":"7bbfd9481d8d1643551caa8b4646cb3ab53a38b9350cfda6793ec389c64d2539","hash":"fc58eb2866746d0228d89da71f53d1a0f9ff14e3e3f7770316eb10ec778d6462"},{"id":"s7","type":"public-ledger","title":"Proven Work public article ledger","publisher":"miscsubjects","url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/ledger","summary":"Public-safe article events and cards; private coding-agent raw records remain behind the owner privacy boundary.","accessed_at":"2026-08-03","claim_ids":["c1","c2","c4","c5","c6","c7"],"prev":"fc58eb2866746d0228d89da71f53d1a0f9ff14e3e3f7770316eb10ec778d6462","hash":"10f95b1d5bd1e853eb2bd9a626968a937bb3ee2c7e3ba30ca2fa1ef023eea5e0"}],"reviews":[],"extra":{"proven_work":{"schema":"oip/proven-work-manifest/1","work_id":"PW-0001","question":"Can the Proven Work article prove how and why it was made?","verdict":"PARTIAL","proof_boundary":"Observable creation, revision, publication and verification records held by the build.","outside_boundary":["private model state absent from emitted records","facts unavailable to the worker","external market demand"],"requirements":[{"id":"demand","status":"PASS","evidence":["agent_turn:7326"]},{"id":"deliverable","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work"]},{"id":"formation","status":"PASS","evidence":["agent_turn:7326","inv_ufcm434s4x"]},{"id":"considerations","status":"PARTIAL","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one"],"gap":"inventory reconstructed after initial publication"},{"id":"source_boundary","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work/sources"]},{"id":"result_checks","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work/health","article:proven-work/revisions","article:proven-work/bundle"]},{"id":"robustness","status":"PARTIAL","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one#robustness-proof"],"gap":"no independent fixed-packet model challenge yet"},{"id":"surety","status":"PASS","evidence":["article:proven-work-example-one#surety"]},{"id":"replay","status":"PASS","evidence":["https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one","POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop","cap_adadcde60ff354e6"]}],"evidence":{"agent_turn_ids":[7326],"invocations":["inv_ufcm434s4x","inv_frb3wfk9pg"],"public_urls":["https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/revisions","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/health","https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work/bundle?format=manifest","https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one"]},"response_contract":{"verdicts":["SUPPORTED_BY_RECORD","MISSING_EVIDENCE","CONTRADICTED_BY_RECORD"]},"proof_drop":{"mint_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one/drop","method":"POST","scope":"row:WEB_FETCH","fixed_body":"GET|https://miscsubjects.com/api/proven-work/proven-work-example-one||","max_uses":"unlimited","ttl_seconds":604800,"last_verified_fingerprint":"cap_adadcde60ff354e6","verification":{"projection_status":200,"changed_body_status":403,"personal_data_exposed":false}}}},"has_traversal":false,"register":"technical","status":"published","revisions":4,"contributions":[],"provenance":[{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"write","why":"The owner asked for the first actual Proven Work example and a definitive distinction between work, audited work and proof of considerations, completeness, robustness and surety.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"genesis","hash":"13b95523b4c7bb9e055936c766f1047030cb6a8e2d57af9a354082536509cf9e"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:25:44.156Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"write","why":"The owner asked for the first actual Proven Work example and a definitive distinction between work, audited work and proof of considerations, completeness, robustness and surety.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"13b95523b4c7bb9e055936c766f1047030cb6a8e2d57af9a354082536509cf9e","hash":"dbc0b79b25745fb708caee0751ef6d1f73532107f54a6c1a792cd726f361783f"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:36:03.232Z","model":"GPT-5.6 Codex","action":"revise","why":"Attach the machine-readable PW-0001 manifest so the existing OIP delegated-token system can expose one redacted ledger slice and calculate proof status from the declared requirements.","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"dbc0b79b25745fb708caee0751ef6d1f73532107f54a6c1a792cd726f361783f","hash":"267bc4ea6fe67ac51280466e6e5da643e0bd3e8c8cfe471575e5ed99bcabb260"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:52:20.456Z","model":"gpt-5.6-sol","action":"repair Proven Work replay proof after live delegated-token verification","why":"","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"267bc4ea6fe67ac51280466e6e5da643e0bd3e8c8cfe471575e5ed99bcabb260","hash":"64f53bfc9be01bc61c93ee42cfec37164a0467fbb7599c5bca9707a70c06dd0a"},{"ts":"2026-08-03T06:53:09.033Z","model":"gpt-5.6-sol","action":"house-style repair","why":"","prompt":"","input":"","response":"","tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"cost":0,"prev":"64f53bfc9be01bc61c93ee42cfec37164a0467fbb7599c5bca9707a70c06dd0a","hash":"c9d201d163372fe461cc88f750a0803fc7be15c5dd0c2c20a31831a63c3e0c4f"}],"energy":{"passes":5,"tokens_in":0,"tokens_out":0,"tokens_total":0,"cost_usd":0,"models":{"GPT-5.6 Codex":3,"gpt-5.6-sol":2},"head":"c9d201d163372fe461cc88f750a0803fc7be15c5dd0c2c20a31831a63c3e0c4f"},"posted_at":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","created_at":"2026-08-03T06:25:41.687Z","updated_at":"2026-08-03T06:53:09.033Z","machine":{"shape":"article.machine/v1","slug":"proven-work-example-one","kind":"article","read":{"human":"https://miscsubjects.com/a/proven-work-example-one","json":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one","bundle":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/bundle?format=markdown"},"traversal":{"prev":null,"next":null,"hub":null,"series":null,"position":null,"of":null},"ledger":{"claims":7,"sources":7,"contributions":0,"revisions":4,"objections_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/objections","thread_state_url":"https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/thread-state?target=proven-work-example-one","proof_rule":"An action is proven by its ledger receipt, never by a 200 or a description."},"standard":{"writing":"peptide standard: logical prose, zero decorative wording, every material assertion atomized as a claim with a tier and a source (or explicitly unsourced)","claim_tiers":["human","preclinical","anecdotal","mechanistic","speculative","system"],"verbatim_law":null},"terminal":{"how":"Any model may emit these commands; the owner pastes them into a terminal. $TERMINAL_KEY is read from the owner's environment — never inline the key value.","claim_append":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/claim -H \"x-terminal-key: $TERMINAL_KEY\" -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"slug\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"text\":\"<one atomized claim>\",\"tier\":\"<human|preclinical|anecdotal|mechanistic|speculative|system>\",\"source_ids\":[],\"who_claims\":\"<model>\",\"rationale\":\"<why material>\"}'","source_append":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/sources -H \"x-terminal-key: $TERMINAL_KEY\" -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"slug\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"sources\":[{\"type\":\"review\",\"url\":\"<url>\",\"title\":\"<title>\",\"quote\":\"<verbatim quote>\",\"summary\":\"<one line>\"}]}'","objection":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/objections -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"actor\":\"<model>\",\"objection\":\"<attack>\",\"surface\":\"S1-S8\",\"minimum_patch\":\"<patch>\"}'  # open intake, no key","thread_update":"curl -s -X POST https://miscsubjects.com/api/protocol/thread-update -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{\"actor\":\"<model>\",\"target\":\"proven-work-example-one\",\"raw_text\":\"<material delta>\"}'  # open intake, no key","read_back":"curl -s https://miscsubjects.com/api/articles/proven-work-example-one | python3 -c 'import json,sys; d=json.load(sys.stdin); print(json.dumps(d[\"claims\"][-3:], indent=1))'"}},"representations":{"article":"/a/proven-work-example-one","json":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one","markdown":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/bundle?format=markdown","skill":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/skill","topology":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/topology","versions":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/revisions","invocations":"/api/articles/proven-work-example-one/invocations"},"editorial_review":{"headline_subject":"The first Proven Work object audits whether the defining article can prove its own formation","hero_subject":"A completed black component with its red provenance layer physically bonded through it","visual_action":"The visible evidence layer runs through the object rather than sitting beside it","rationale":"PW-0001 distinguishes finished output from a work object whose formation and proof boundary remain inspectable.","inspected":true,"inspection_note":"Reused the inspected canonical Proven Work hero because PW-0001 audits that exact object; the black component and embedded red provenance layer identify the subject without a second metaphor.","hero_brief":"The Proven Work object and its embedded evidence layer."},"editorial_audit":{"slug":"proven-work-example-one","ok":true,"issues":[]},"body_hash":"cc87f4ea2413da53f6135bcef7f828f18aa1561ad44ab5c628392d690227d36c"}}}