Continuity Evidence Ladder

# Continuity Evidence Ladder **Entity class:** Concept or analytic term **Domain:** Digital Afterlife / Research Method / Provenance **Doc Type:** Canonical Concept **Maturity:** Developed **Evidence / Concept Status:** Canonical evidence methodology ## Definition The **Continuity Evidence Ladder** classifies findings so enacted law, official policy, programs, deliberation, funded research, independent proposals, private precedent, corpus synthesis, and red-team hypotheses cannot be mistaken for one another. ## Continuity Significance It is essential because digital-afterlife architecture is currently fragmented and inference-heavy. ## Existing Architecture / Evidence Levels A–G are: A binding; B official policy; C active program; D deliberation; E government-funded research; F policy-facing independent research; G private precedent. ## Claim Layers Within an Item The ladder classifies the institutional status of a source; it leaves the type of continuity claim unresolved. A single program or record should separately identify: 1. **authorization** — who approved the relevant act; 2. **lineage** — the causal and custodial chain from source to claimant; 3. **state integrity** — completeness, fixity and interpretability; 4. **behavioral fidelity** — performance or resemblance under declared tests; 5. **continuity claim** — whether the evidence is offered as artifact authenticity, succession, survival or numerical identity. [[wiki/Verification of Continuity Claims|Verification of Continuity Claims]] supplies the corresponding verification method. Strong behavioral evidence cannot silently substitute for weak lineage or authorization. ## Evidentiary Boundary / Red-Team Note Corpus Synthesis and Red-Team Hypothesis should be marked separately from Levels A–G. ## Related Ontology [[wiki/Digital Afterlife Research Method|Digital Afterlife Research Method]] · [[wiki/Continuity Convergence|Continuity Convergence]] · [[wiki/Evidence Boundary|Evidence Boundary]] ## Relationships  This entry is routed through [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]] and [[collections/Consciousness Continuity|Consciousness Continuity]]. Its source context is developed in [[articles/Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] and [[articles/The Next Interface Layer|The Next Interface Layer]]. Status-qualified source edges are preserved in the terminal Research Edges section. ### Connections in this corpus - [[wiki/Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] provides a canonical route to **Continuity Evidence Ladder**. ### Additional Documented Relationships - [[wiki/Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] provides a canonical route to **Continuity Evidence Ladder**.  ## Related Work in the Corpus  - In [[articles/Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]], **XV. What the 2025 article got wrong** provides the narrative context for **Continuity Evidence Ladder**: Interoperability at this scale is engineered.  ## Research Edges  #### Consciousness mapping and transfer graph patch — 2026-09-10 **Collections:** [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]] · [[collections/Consciousness Continuity|Consciousness Continuity]] **Relationship source:** [[research/Consciousness Mapping and Transfer Ecosystem Relationship Graph - 2026-09-10|Consciousness Mapping and Transfer Ecosystem Relationship Graph — 2026-09-10]] **Related source articles:** [[articles/Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] · [[articles/The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards|The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards]] · [[articles/2026 Annual Report on Brain-Computer Interfaces|2026 Annual Report on Brain-Computer Interfaces]] · [[articles/The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas|The Organic-Synthetic Brain Atlas]] #### Incoming typed edges - **Edge 812 — [[wiki/Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] `canonical_route_to` → this entry** — **WIKI_INTEGRATION**; evidence `WIKI_CURRENT`, `ARTICLE_NEW`.  ## Research Inference Attractors  These are secondary semantic placements for the inference attractor network. Each statement keeps its original ID and tier; its canonical cluster page links back to every destination. Source register: [[research/Research Inferences|Research Inferences]]. Interpretive context: [[articles/Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer|Technologies for Consciousness Mapping and Transfer]] and [[articles/Mind Uploading and AI — The Host is Reusable and the Person is the Delta|Mind Uploading and AI — The Host is Reusable and the Person is the Delta]]. Collection route: [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]]. - **INF-0488 — Analytic.** The interface, the corpus, the substrate, the standards, and the legal category are five independent tracks that must meet for continuity to be operational. Tracking them separately and noting where they touch is the method by which the trajectory becomes legible. - **Canonical cluster:** [[wiki/State Sufficiency Problem|State Sufficiency Problem]] - **INF-0494 — Analytic.** The interval between a capability existing and its public authorization is set by politics, liability, and market readiness rather than by technical maturity. Measuring the lag in adjacent fields gives a defensible estimate for this one. - **Canonical cluster:** [[wiki/State Sufficiency Problem|State Sufficiency Problem]]