CNS 8.0 / Grounded Dialectical Orthesis

Chiral Narrative Synthesis 8.0

Grounded Dialectical Orthesis

This docset defines Chiral Narrative Synthesis 8.0 (CNS 8.0).

CNS 8.0 uses the original CNS sequence:

conflicting narrative objects
→ chiral opposition
→ evidential entanglement
→ antagonist pressure
→ proof-grounded tensor closure
→ contradiction residuals
→ predicate invention
→ synthesized SNO
→ orthesis candidate
→ audit / uncertainty report

The evidence/access/possible-world machinery is included only as a constraint and reporting substrate. It does not replace narrative synthesis.

Package map

• TOC.md — source table of contents.
• docs/ — research proposal, theory, architecture, implementation, experiments, and contribution analysis.
• schemas/ — JSON schemas for SNO-8, evidence atoms, proof traces, and orthesis reports.
• sketches/ — small Python sketches for the computational components.
• configs/ — MVP config and runtime policy examples.
• experiments/ — experiment matrix and ablation suite.
• prompts/ — bounded LLM role prompts.
• examples/ — worked example of CNS 8.0 resolving a conflict.
• refs/ — annotated references and BibTeX.

Naming rule

Use Chiral Narrative Synthesis or CNS 8.0 for the work. Do not rename the framework around any grounding subsystem.

What CNS 8.0 preserves

• Structured Narrative Objects as the main data object.
• Dialectical roles: Proposer, Antagonist, Synthesizer, critic ensemble.
• Chirality as structured asymmetry, not generic disagreement.
• Evidential Entanglement as the conflict selector.
• Orthesis as stable synthesis candidate / fixed point.
• Tensor logic as proof-carrying synthesis substrate.
• Predicate invention as contradiction-driven hidden-context discovery.
• Topology / holonomy as diagnostics of synthesis difficulty.
• Grounding, access states, possible worlds, oracle boundaries, and audit trails as constraints.

Version

Prepared: 2026-05-15
Status: research proposal + implementation plan + test plan, not full production code.

Site Table of Contents

• CNS 8.0 Table of Contents: Original CNS 8.0 source package table of contents.
• 01 — CNS 8.0 Research Proposal: Chiral Narrative Synthesis 8.0: Grounded Dialectical Orthesis through Chiral Tension, Evidential Entanglement, Tensor Logic, and Predicate Invention
• 02 — Lineage Repair Audit: This document states what CNS 8.0 restores, what it keeps from the grounding/access work, and what it rejects.
• 03 — Core Theory: H is the central hypothesis or account embedding. G= is a typed reasoning graph. E is the evidence set attached to claims and relations. A is the record-access state set. P is a proof-trace bundle. R is a residual con…
• 04 — Mathematical Specification: Let \mathcal{T} be a tensor-logic space containing atoms, predicates, rules, proof traces, and constraint states.
• 05 — SNO-8 Object Model: A claim is not promoted unless it has evidence status and proof status.
• 06 — Dialectical Agent Architecture: chunk documents into stable spans; hash spans; attach source metadata; record access state; expose retrieval API.
• 07 — Tensor Logic and Predicate Invention: CNS needs a proof substrate that can operate over evidence-linked claims and relations. Tensor logic gives CNS a way to express rules as tensor contractions and closures. This allows strict proof paths for claims that…
• 08 — Language–Logic Bundle and Chirality: Semantic similarity does not imply logical compatibility. Two texts can be semantically close because they discuss the same thing while logically opposing each other. CNS 8.0 separates language from logic so that this…
• 09 — Grounding, Access, and Multiverse Views: Grounding, access states, and multiverse views constrain and explain synthesis. They do not perform the synthesis step.
• 10 — LLM and Fine-Tuning Strategy: | Role | LLM use | |—|—| | Proposer | extract claims, relations, candidate SNOs | | Antagonist | generate critique probes and possible contradictions | | Predicate labeler | label latent tensor factors in readable…
• 11 — Implementation Plan: Build a CNS 8.0 prototype that can process a small evidence corpus, produce SNOs, identify productive contradictions, perform proof-constrained synthesis, recover simple latent predicates on synthetic tasks, and emit…
• 12 — Experiment and Evaluation Plan: Test whether contradiction-driven predicate invention recovers hidden context variables.
• 13 — Metrics and Acceptance Criteria: Fraction of cited evidence references that resolve to known evidence atoms.
• 14 — Prior Art and Contribution Boundary: This document states what prior work covers and where CNS 8.0 differs.
• 15 — Risk Register and Failure Modes: Symptom: final output is top worlds or claim labels but no synthesized SNO.
• 16 — Publication Plan: Title: Chiral Narrative Synthesis 8.0: Grounded Dialectical Orthesis for Proof-Carrying Narrative Resolution
• 17 — Glossary: Chiral Narrative Synthesis : A framework for grounded dialectical synthesis over structured narrative objects.
• 18 — Architecture Diagram Notes: The orthesis criterion tests whether the G\circ S loop preserves proof-critical structure.
• 19 — Runtime Oracle Boundary Policy: CNS 8.0 can use oracles during training and evaluation. Runtime analysis cannot use hidden labels, answer keys, or LLM judgments.
• 20 — MVP Build Checklist: Small evidence corpus prepared. Synthetic latent-context dataset generated. Train/dev/test split hashes recorded. Gold labels isolated from runtime.
• 21 — Source Lineage Matrix: CNS 8.0 consolidates the earlier CNS line around the parts that support the original mechanism.
• 22 — Theory Claims, Assumptions, and Theorem Sketches: Statement. Productive synthesis pairs require both chiral opposition and evidential entanglement.
• 23 — Data and Run Manifest Specification: CNS 8.0 experiment records track oracle separation and reproducibility.
• 24 — Dashboard and Audit UI Plan: The dashboard shows CNS structure directly instead of reducing a run to one answer.
• 25 — Repository Layout: schema and evidence store; SNO parser and validator; critics; pair selector; proof closure; predicate invention; Synthesizer; orthesis loop; audit report; dashboard.
• 26 — Human Review Protocol: high chiral tension and high stakes; access gaps block strict claims; predicate invention proposes high-impact latent context; residual contradiction remains high; calibration confidence is poor; strict claims are imp…
• 27 — Naming and Substrate Policy: grounding substrate; proof substrate; access-aware substrate; possible-world uncertainty layer.
• 28 — Validation Scenarios: high entanglement; low chirality; no synthesis required; possible merge/deduplication.
• Worked Example — CNS 8.0 Resolves a Conditional Contradiction: The evidence sets overlap through shared measurements and trial endpoints. Entanglement is moderate/high.
• Sample CNS 8.0 Audit Report: Claim C1 follows from evidence e1, e2 under rule rsupportsfromentailment. Claim C2 follows from evidence e3 under rule rrefutesfromentailment.
• Annotated References: The CNS 2.0 lineage defines Structured Narrative Objects, the multi-component critic pipeline, the dialectical synthesis engine, and Evidential Entanglement. CNS 8.0 uses that object model and pipeline.
• CNS 8.0 Test Plan: EvidenceAtom hashing and lookup. SNO schema validation. citation-validity rejection behavior. evidence entanglement calculation. graph chirality proxy. zero-temperature closure. proof trace recording. ZTHR calculati…
• Runtime Configuration: CNS 8.0 MVP runtime configuration from the source package.
• Experiment Resource Files: Experiment matrix and ablation suite definitions for CNS 8.0.
• Prompt Templates: Bounded role prompts for the CNS 8.0 proposer, antagonist, synthesizer, and auditor.
• JSON Schemas: Source JSON schemas for SNO-8, evidence atoms, proof traces, and orthesis reports.
• Python Sketches: Reference Python sketches for CNS 8.0 computational components.
• Source Manifest: CNS 8.0 source package manifest retained for provenance.