UI Integrity - Bryant McGill

# UI Integrity **Entity class:** Concept or analytic term **Domain:** Continuity Engineering / Executable Personhood **UI Integrity** is the capacity of an uploaded or reconstructed person to preserve identity-relevant organization under sustained execution, acceleration, copying, migration, restoration and environmental interaction. It is not equivalent to software uptime. A process may continue running while its memory, values, autobiographical access or relational commitments degrade beyond recognition. _Pantheon_ makes integrity a form of mortality. Heavy computation damages early UIs, so speed becomes metabolic expenditure and repair becomes continuity medicine. The cure then becomes a political resource: whoever controls it can decide which persons continue, which fail and which may be used as repair material. Integrity therefore joins engineering to rights. It requires provenance, checkpoints, semantic re-entry, restoration testing and protection against covert modification. [[wiki/Boot Success Is Not Identity Proof|Boot success]] establishes execution, not identity. A restoration must also answer the [[wiki/State Sufficiency Problem|State Sufficiency Problem]] and preserve [[wiki/Memory Continuity|Memory Continuity]]. ## Runtime Coherence Integrity must be evaluated through time. [[wiki/Runtime Coherence|Runtime Coherence]] asks whether a running person can integrate new experience, revise beliefs and preserve autobiographical order without collapsing into contradiction or fragmentation. Acquisition fidelity and a convincing first boot are necessary evidence, but neither proves longitudinal viability. [[wiki/Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox|The Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox]] adds the complementary warning: exact resemblance can become brittle when the system does not preserve the capacity to forget, reconsolidate, reinterpret and diverge. Related: [[wiki/Restoration Integrity|Restoration Integrity]], [[wiki/Computational Metabolism|Computational Metabolism]], [[wiki/Continuity Resource Allocation|Continuity Resource Allocation]], [[wiki/Runtime Coherence|Runtime Coherence]], [[wiki/Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox|Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox]]. ## Neurotech cluster route **Collection:** [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]] **Source articles:** [[articles/The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards|The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards]] ## Relationships **Related nodes:** [[wiki/Boot Success Is Not Identity Proof|Boot Success Is Not Identity Proof]] · [[wiki/State Sufficiency Problem|State Sufficiency Problem]] · [[wiki/Memory Continuity|Memory Continuity]] · [[wiki/Runtime Coherence|Runtime Coherence]] · [[wiki/Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox|Fidelity–Plasticity Paradox]] · [[wiki/Restoration Integrity|Restoration Integrity]] · [[wiki/Computational Metabolism|Computational Metabolism]] · [[wiki/Continuity Resource Allocation|Continuity Resource Allocation]] [[wiki/UI Integrity|UI Integrity]] is related to [[collections/Neurotech|Neurotech]] through [[articles/The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards|The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards]].  This entry's documented connections are expressed in its definition and related-work routes, with provenance retained in the source-linked material.  ## Related Work in the Corpus  - In [[articles/The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards|The Architecture of Continuity and Emerging Neuroinformatics Standards]], **Pantheon Interface** provides the narrative context for **UI Integrity**: UI Integrity is the fictional test of whether stored neural and cognitive state remains semantically re-enterable after substrate transition.