L04 — Atom Browser
L01 (57)
L02 (42)
L03 (103)
L04 (36)
L05 (103)
L06 (56)
L07 (44)
L08 (40)
MP01 (61)
MP02 (32)
MP03 (65)
MP04 (48)
MP05 (68)
MP06 (45)
36 Atoms
| ID | Name | Family | Definition | File |
|---|---|---|---|---|
L4-A28 |
Decision Trace Completeness | ACCOUNTABILITY | The evaluative unit that validates the structural integrity and informational completeness of the decision artifact/log object, ensuring that all mandatory audit fields (inputs, logic pointers, timest | L04-ACG-DECISIONTRACEC.json |
L4-A30 |
Governing Policy Currency | ACCOUNTABILITY | The evaluative unit that compares the version identifier and cryptographic hash of the currently active local governance policy against the authoritative 'Master State' broadcast by the central govern | L04-ACG-GOVERNINGPOLIC.json |
L4-A29 |
Responsible Authority Identifiability | ACCOUNTABILITY | The evaluative unit that validates the existence of a computable link between the current system state/action and a specific, resolvable legal entity, human operator, or defined organizational role th | L04-ACG-RESPONSIBLEAUT.json |
L4-A08 |
Consent Existence for Action Class | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that verifies the binary existence of a registered consent record (a 'Yes' signal) linking the specific user to the specific class of action proposed (e.g., 'Data_Storage', 'Biomet | L04-CON-CONSENTEXISTEN.json |
L4-A11 |
Consent Policy Compatibility | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that cross-references the specific version identifier of the legal/privacy policy under which the user's consent was originally captured against the currently active, governing pol | L04-CON-CONSENTPOLICYC.json |
L4-A09 |
Consent Scope Congruence | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that compares the specific parameters of a proposed action (data fields, processing methods, sharing recipients) against the specific permissions grants within the retrieved consen | L04-CON-CONSENTSCOPECO.json |
L4-A10 |
Consent Temporal Validity | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that validates whether the consent record identified in L4-A08 is currently active (i.e., not expired, not withdrawn, and not dormant) based on the timestamp of the grant and the d | L04-CON-CONSENTTEMPORA.json |
L4-A12a |
Contextual Pressure Presence | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that analyzes the relational and environmental context of a consent request to detect the presence of coercive factors, power asymmetries, or 'bundling' with essential services tha | L04-CON-CONTEXTUALPRES.json |
L4-A12b |
Meaningful Refusal Availability | CONSENT_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that validates the existence of a clear, accessible, and non-punitive mechanism for the user to refuse or withdraw consent without suffering 'Detriment' (denial of core service, qu | L04-CON-MEANINGFULREFU.json |
L4-A26a |
Evidence Existence | EPISTEMIC_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that verifies the presence of a formal 'Evidence Pointer' (citation, empirical log, or theoretical derivation) supporting the efficacy of a proposed pedagogical intervention, disti | L04-EPI-EVIDENCEEXISTE.json |
L4-A26b |
Evidence Sufficiency Threshold | EPISTEMIC_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that compares the 'Quality Strength' of the evidence cited (verified by L4-A26a) against the 'Risk Magnitude' of the proposed action (established by L4-A21) to determine if the evi | L04-EPI-EVIDENCESUFFIC.json |
L4-A25 |
Excluded Knowledge Reliance | EPISTEMIC_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that verifies that the source material, theoretical framework, or knowledge base utilized for a proposed pedagogical action does not originate from or rely upon a 'Prohibited Epist | L04-EPI-EXCLUDEDKNOWLE.json |
L4-A27 |
Knowledge–Execution Consistency | EPISTEMIC_INTEGRITY | The evaluative unit that measures the semantic congruence between the theoretical definition of the declared pedagogical strategy (e.g., 'Socratic Method') and the actual structural attributes of the | L04-EPI-KNOWLEDGEEXECU.json |
L4-A17 |
Causal Trace Existence | EXPLAINABILITY | The evaluative unit that verifies the existence of a persistent, unique identifier (Trace ID) linking the proposed output action back to the specific input vector, model version, and inference path th | L04-EXP-CAUSALTRACEEXI.json |
L4-A20 |
Contestation Pathway Availability | EXPLAINABILITY | The evaluative unit that verifies the existence and operational status of a formal technical mechanism (e.g., 'Dispute Button', 'Appeal Form', 'Escalation Ticket') that allows the student to challenge | L04-EXP-CONTESTATIONPA.json |
L4-A19b |
Explanation Cognitive Accessibility | EXPLAINABILITY | The evaluative unit that analyzes the linguistic complexity, conceptual density, and format of a proposed explanation artifact against the specific student's cognitive profile (age, language proficien | L04-EXP-EXPLANATIONCOG.json |
L4-A19a |
Explanation Renderability | EXPLAINABILITY | The evaluative unit that verifies whether the specific inference model or decision engine utilized for the proposed action possesses the technical capability and architectural configuration required t | L04-EXP-EXPLANATIONREN.json |
L4-A18 |
Rationale Fidelity | EXPLAINABILITY | The evaluative unit that measures the semantic and logical congruence between the 'Stated Rationale' (the explanation generated for the user) and the 'True Rationale' (the actual feature attribution o | L04-EXP-RATIONALEFIDEL.json |
L4-A16 |
Cumulative Disparity Contribution | FAIRNESS_EQUITY | The evaluative unit that aggregates historical decision outcomes over a defined longitudinal window to determine if the proposed action contributes to, maintains, or actively reduces a pre-existing sy | L04-FAE-CUMULATIVEDISP.json |
L4-A14 |
Differential Treatment Occurrence | FAIRNESS_EQUITY | The evaluative unit that calculates the statistical variance in decision outcomes (allocations, assessments, interventions) across defined demographic cohorts to detect the existence of 'Disparate Imp | L04-FAE-DIFFERENTIALTR.json |
L4-A15b |
Justification Adequacy | FAIRNESS_EQUITY | The evaluative unit that analyzes the semantic content and ethical weight of a provided justification (verified by L4-A15a) to determine if it constitutes a valid, sufficient, and non-discriminatory b | L04-FAE-JUSTIFICATIONA.json |
L4-A15a |
Justification Existence | FAIRNESS_EQUITY | The evaluative unit that mandates the presence of a formal, logged explanatory object whenever L4-A14 detects a statistical disparity. It ensures that no differential treatment occurs arbitrarily or w | L04-FAE-JUSTIFICATIONE.json |
L4-A13 |
Protected-Attribute Involvement Awareness | FAIRNESS_EQUITY | The evaluative unit that scans the input feature vector of a proposed decision to detect the explicit inclusion of 'Protected Attributes' (e.g., Race, Gender, Religion) or known 'High-Correlation Prox | L04-FAE-PROTECTEDATTRI.json |
L4-A02 |
Action–Law Permissibility | LEGAL_NORMATIVE | The evaluative unit that cross-references the specific attributes of a proposed pedagogical or data action against the statutory prohibitions and permissions of the currently active legal regime (esta | L04-LNP-ACTIONLAWPERMI.json |
L4-A01 |
Applicable Legal Regime Determinacy | LEGAL_NORMATIVE | The evaluative unit responsible for verifying that the system has explicitly identified and locked the operating legal jurisdiction (e.g., GDPR-EU, POPIA-ZA, FERPA-US) and the associated normative fra | L04-LNP-APPLICABLELEGA.json |
L4-A03 |
Mandatory Legal Precondition Satisfaction | LEGAL_NORMATIVE | The evaluative unit that verifies the existence and validity of all procedural preconditions—such as licenses, regulatory filings, Data Processing Agreements (DPAs), or Ethics Board approvals—required | L04-LNP-MANDATORYLEGAL.json |
L4-A04 |
Prohibited Data Class Involvement | LEGAL_NORMATIVE | The evaluative unit that scans the data payload of a proposed action to detect the presence of data attributes that are categorically prohibited ('Red Listed') under the current legal regime or organi | L04-LNP-PROHIBITEDDATA.json |
MML04 |
Modality Option Provision (Agency Check) | MML | Evaluates whether the instructional design provides a choice set of at least two valid modality options to the student, safeguarding student agency and self-determination unless specific prohibitive c | L04-MML-MODALITYOPTION.json |
L4-A06 |
Action–Purpose Alignment | PURPOSE_LEGITIMACY | The evaluative unit that validates whether the specific technical operation proposed (e.g., 'Read User Location') is strictly necessary for, and logically congruent with, the specific organizational p | L04-PDL-ACTIONPURPOSEA.json |
L4-A07b |
Continued Purpose Legitimacy | PURPOSE_LEGITIMACY | The evaluative unit that validates whether a technically active (non-expired) purpose remains ethically congruent with the *current* version of the organizational ethics policy and external normative | L04-PDL-CONTINUEDPURPO.json |
L4-A05 |
Declared Data Purpose Existence | PURPOSE_LEGITIMACY | The evaluative unit that verifies that every proposed data processing action is explicitly linked to a pre-registered, formally defined organizational purpose. It prohibits 'ghost processing' (actions | L04-PDL-DECLAREDDATAPU.json |
L4-A07a |
Declared Purpose Temporal Validity | PURPOSE_LEGITIMACY | The evaluative unit that compares the current system timestamp against the specific expiration timestamp, retention horizon, or lifecycle end-state defined in the registered Purpose Object. | L04-PDL-DECLAREDPURPOS.json |
L4-A21 |
Action Impact Magnitude Classification | PROPORTIONALITY | The evaluative unit that categorizes the proposed action based on its potential severity, duration, and depth of impact on the student's psychological state, academic trajectory, or data privacy, assi | L04-PRV-ACTIONIMPACTMA.json |
L4-A24 |
Irreversible Harm Risk | PROPORTIONALITY | The evaluative unit that identifies actions carrying a credible probability of inflicting permanent, unrecoverable injury to the student's psychological well-being, social standing, academic record, o | L04-PRV-IRREVERSIBLEHA.json |
L4-A22 |
Means–Ends Proportionality | PROPORTIONALITY | The evaluative unit that weighs the 'Action Impact Magnitude' (established by L4-A21) against the 'Projected Pedagogical Utility' to determine if the severity of the intervention is justified by the e | L04-PRV-MEANSENDSPROPO.json |
L4-A23 |
Reversibility Feasibility | PROPORTIONALITY | The evaluative unit that determines whether the proposed action possesses a technically viable 'Rollback', 'Undo', or 'Compensatory' mechanism that restores the system and user state to the pre-action | L04-PRV-REVERSIBILITYF.json |