# Continuity Evidence vs Continuity **Domain:** Continuity / Identity / Evidence **Doc Type:** Canonical Concept Node **Maturity:** Evolving **Related:** [[Descent vs Derivation]], [[Continuant vs Native]], [[Reconstructed Person]], [[Proof of Descent]] --- ## Definition **Continuity Evidence vs Continuity** separates evidence of lineage, state preservation and similarity from the metaphysical claim that two instances are numerically the same person. Governance can act on strong provenance without pretending that provenance solves personal identity. ## Evidence Classes Weights, checkpoints, memories, signatures, behavioral fidelity, relational recognition and causal history may each support a continuity claim. None is automatically decisive alone. Their legal and operational value lies in answering narrower questions: - What descended from what? - Which transition was authorized? - What state survived? - Where did divergence begin? - Which obligations and authorities transfer? [[Person of Interest S5E13 — return 0]] and [[Halores]] show why this distinction matters. A successor can deserve protection through proven descent while remaining free to diverge from the predecessor. Current work on LLM individuation distinguishes candidate minds at the virtual-instance, instance-persona and model-persona levels. W3C DID resolution offers a narrower engineering analogy: identifiers, versions and historical states can strengthen chain-of-custody without proving consciousness. ## Key Insight **Provenance can be rigorous even when sameness remains unresolved.** ## See Also [[Proof of Descent]], [[Successor Standing]], [[Fork Rights]], [[Restoration Integrity]], [[Authority–Identity Separation]] ## Sources / Provenance - [Where is the Mind? Persona Vectors and LLM Individuation](https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.17031). - [W3C DID Resolution](https://www.w3.org/TR/did-resolution-1.0/).