← Documentation home

Canonical Markdown source · Oct 20, 2018

Connections editorial review: Flowers across two centuries

product/connections-editorial-review.md · 92 lines · SHA-256 1f6b22f8f7ab

Status: optional external-validation packet; no external sign-off received.

Prepared 2026-08-07.

This packet promotes a Connection from an operator-reviewed public experiment to

the externally validated assurance tier. It is not required for independent

research or a bounded public experiment that visibly discloses the absence of

external expert review. A project operator must still perform the final public

release action; agents never publish autonomously.

Review the deployed journey at

`/connections/flowers-across-two-centuries`

and open both cited museum records before completing this form.

Claim under review

Both museum records explicitly identify flowers in the work title. The journey

compares this documented subject only; it does not claim influence, shared

meaning, or a direct historical relationship between the works.

Human checklist

  • [ ] Both displayed titles and dates agree with the cited museum records.
  • [ ] The works belong to two different museum providers.
  • [ ] The claim is limited to documented metadata.
  • [ ] The boundary against influence and shared meaning is clear to a general reader.
  • [ ] “High confidence” describes metadata support, not interpretive certainty.
  • [ ] Each material statement is labeled as fact, inference, or speculation and resolves to its displayed citation.
  • [ ] The method is reproducible from the two declared source records.
  • [ ] Rejected influence and shared-meaning hypotheses are clearly documented.
  • [ ] Novelty remains “not verified” unless a qualified literature review is attached.
  • [ ] The JSON record matches the public story, dossier, citations, review state, and rights boundary.
  • [ ] Rights, source, and onward artwork links remain understandable on mobile and desktop.

Decision records

Three distinct, attributable human decisions are required for the externally

validated tier. Keep the private

reviewer-code mapping and signed evidence outside the repository; the intake

file uses opaque `REV-...` codes and retained-evidence references only.

Editorial

  • Reviewer code:
  • Qualification:
  • Review date (UTC):
  • Decision (`approved` or `changes-requested`):
  • Notes:
  • Retained evidence reference:

Rights

  • Reviewer code:
  • Qualification:
  • Review date (UTC):
  • Decision (`approved` or `changes-requested`):
  • Notes:
  • Retained evidence reference:

Subject matter

  • Reviewer code:
  • Qualification:
  • Review date (UTC):
  • Decision (`approved` or `changes-requested`):
  • Notes:
  • Retained evidence reference:

After the three humans complete their decisions, transcribe only the privacy-safe

fields into a local JSON intake file and run

`pnpm connections:first-review -- --input=path/to/reviews.json --check`. The

command rejects direct identifiers, fixture/demo evidence, duplicate reviewers,

and incomplete decisions. It updates the external-validation artifact at

`artifacts/product-discovery/pd3-first-journey-review-latest.json`; do not add

expert-validation, novelty, sensitive, or licensing claims unless the resulting

status is `approved`. Operator-reviewed experimental journeys may proceed under

the narrower roadmap tier without representing this packet as complete.

Synchronized artifacts

uncertainties, rejected hypotheses, novelty status, and rights boundary

  • Public visual story: `/connections/flowers-across-two-centuries`
  • Research dossier: the “Research dossier” section on that page, including method,
  • Machine record: `/api/cultural-intelligence/flowers-across-two-centuries`

The machine record is evaluation-only until commercial terms and the rights of

each underlying source are reviewed separately. Consent-gated

`connection_story_completion` and `connection_reuse_interest` signals are kept

outside the five-event PD0 denominator; institutional usefulness, agent minutes,

editorial minutes, and novelty verification require attributable review evidence.