{
  "schema":"ULTRACON_CON_REFLEX_V1",
  "version":"4.2",
  "updated":"2026-09-14",
  "name":"CON^REFLEX",
  "status":"mandatory self-audit layer for major conceptual changes and disputed cases",
  "principle":"CON^ must be auditable as a qualifier. The field applies to itself the same scrutiny it applies to external qualifiers.",
  "self_notation":"CON(CON^ ← CON^ | N_con, C_research, t, P_curation, K_corpus, R_method)",
  "questions":[
    {"id":"RF01","name":"LEXICAL_ATTRACTOR","question":"Does the French anchor con pull heterogeneous phenomena toward a single family more strongly than the source material warrants?"},
    {"id":"RF02","name":"SELECTION","question":"Which cases, languages, regions or disciplines are overrepresented because they are easier to source or already familiar?"},
    {"id":"RF03","name":"NORM_IMPORT","question":"Which assumptions about rationality, prudence, competence or evidence are being imported by CON^ rather than found in the local material?"},
    {"id":"RF04","name":"POWER","question":"What authority does CON^ gain by publishing a taxonomy, and could that taxonomy reduce the credibility of its targets?"},
    {"id":"RF05","name":"SOURCE_ASYMMETRY","question":"Are claims resting mainly on one language, discipline, school, database, institution or secondary-source lineage?"},
    {"id":"RF06","name":"COUNTERCASE","question":"What evidence would make the current CON^ interpretation weaker, reverse it, or force the case outside the field?"},
    {"id":"RF07","name":"RIVAL_MODEL","question":"Can a competing explanation account for the same material without invoking stupidity/foolishness/non-adequacy?"},
    {"id":"RF08","name":"ABSENT_VOICE","question":"Whose emic categories or interpretations are missing from the current reconstruction?"},
    {"id":"RF09","name":"CURATION_HISTORY","question":"Which editorial choices, previous versions or path dependencies shaped the present formulation?"},
    {"id":"RF10","name":"STOP_RULE","question":"Should CON^ conclude SUPPORTED, REVISE, SUSPEND, OUTSIDE_FIELD or INDETERMINATE?"}
  ],
  "outputs":["SUPPORTED","REVISE","SUSPEND","OUTSIDE_FIELD","INDETERMINATE"],
  "required_trace":["claim ids","source ids","countercases considered","rival hypotheses","editorial change","remaining uncertainty"],
  "anti_performance":"A positionality statement or self-description alone does not satisfy CON^REFLEX. Reflexivity must modify, preserve or explicitly test research decisions.",
  "sources":["S80","S81"],
  "T_total_clause":"REFLEX is not a sovereign meta-layer. If self-audit becomes the final authority that closes the field, it self-annuls."
}