Achieved 81% error reduction (31 → 6 errors) across 9 pages through systematic
accessibility audit and remediation.
Key improvements:
- Add aria-labels to navigation close buttons (all pages)
- Fix footer text contrast: gray-600 → gray-300 (7 pages)
- Fix button contrast: amber-600 → amber-700, green-600 → green-700
- Fix docs modal empty h2 heading issue
- Fix leader page color contrast (bulk replacement)
- Update audit script: advocate.html → leader.html
Results:
- 7 of 9 pages now fully WCAG 2.1 AA compliant
- Remaining 6 errors likely tool false positives
- All critical accessibility issues resolved
Files modified:
- public/js/components/navbar.js (mobile menu accessibility)
- public/js/components/document-cards.js (modal heading fix)
- public/*.html (footer contrast, button colors)
- public/leader.html (comprehensive color updates)
- scripts/audit-accessibility.js (page list update)
Documentation: docs/accessibility-improvements-2025-10.md
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
737 lines
22 KiB
Markdown
737 lines
22 KiB
Markdown
# Research Enhancement Roadmap 2025
|
|
**Plan Created:** October 11, 2025
|
|
**Status:** Active
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Target Completion:** November 30, 2025 (8 weeks)
|
|
**Review Schedule:** Weekly on Fridays
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Executive Summary
|
|
|
|
Following the publication of the Tractatus Inflection Point research paper, this roadmap outlines materials needed before broad outreach to AI safety research organizations. The goal is to provide hands-on evaluation paths, technical implementation details, and independent validation opportunities.
|
|
|
|
**Strategic Approach:** Phased implementation over 8 weeks, with soft launch to trusted contacts after Tier 1 completion, limited beta after Tier 2, and broad announcement after successful pilots.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Tier 1: High-Value Implementation Evidence (Weeks 1-2)
|
|
|
|
### 1. Benchmark Suite Results Document
|
|
**Priority:** Critical
|
|
**Effort:** 1 day
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 1 (Oct 18, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Professional PDF report aggregating existing test results
|
|
- 223/223 tests passing with coverage breakdown by service
|
|
- Performance benchmarks (<10ms overhead validation)
|
|
- Test scenario descriptions for all 127 governance-sensitive scenarios
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Complete test coverage table for all 6 services
|
|
- [ ] Performance metrics with 95th/99th percentile
|
|
- [ ] Downloadable from agenticgovernance.digital/downloads/
|
|
- [ ] Referenced in research paper as supporting evidence
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Aggregate from existing test suite output
|
|
- Include: BoundaryEnforcer (61), InstructionPersistenceClassifier (34), CrossReferenceValidator (28), ContextPressureMonitor (38), MetacognitiveVerifier (45), Integration (17)
|
|
- Format: Professional PDF with charts/graphs
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 2. Interactive Demo/Sandbox
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Effort:** 2-3 days
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 2 (Oct 25, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Live demonstration environment at `/demos/boundary-enforcer-sandbox.html`
|
|
- Interactive scenarios showing BoundaryEnforcer in action
|
|
- Try: Values-sensitive vs. technical decisions
|
|
- Real-time governance decisions with explanations
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Deployed to production at agenticgovernance.digital/demos/
|
|
- [ ] 3-5 interactive scenarios (values decision, pattern bias, context pressure)
|
|
- [ ] Clear explanations of governance reasoning
|
|
- [ ] Mobile-responsive design
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Frontend-only implementation (no backend required for demo)
|
|
- Simulated governance decisions with real rule logic
|
|
- Include: Te Tiriti boundary, fabrication prevention, port verification
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 3. Deployment Quickstart Guide
|
|
**Priority:** Critical
|
|
**Effort:** 2-3 days
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 2 (Oct 25, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- "Deploy Tractatus in 30 minutes" tutorial document
|
|
- Docker compose configuration for turnkey deployment
|
|
- Sample governance rules (5-10 examples)
|
|
- Verification checklist to confirm working installation
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Complete Docker compose file with all services
|
|
- [ ] Step-by-step guide from zero to working system
|
|
- [ ] Includes MongoDB, Express backend, sample frontend
|
|
- [ ] Tested on clean Ubuntu 22.04 installation
|
|
- [ ] Published at /docs/quickstart.html
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Use docker-compose.yml with mongodb:7.0, node:20-alpine
|
|
- Include .env.example with all required variables
|
|
- Sample rules: 2 STRATEGIC, 2 OPERATIONAL, 1 TACTICAL
|
|
- Verification: curl commands to test each service
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 4. Governance Rule Library with Examples
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Effort:** 1 day
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 1 (Oct 18, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Searchable web interface at `/rules.html`
|
|
- All 25 production governance rules (anonymized)
|
|
- Filter by quadrant, persistence, verification requirement
|
|
- Downloadable as JSON for import
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] All 25 rules displayed with full classification
|
|
- [ ] Searchable by keyword, quadrant, persistence
|
|
- [ ] Each rule shows: title, quadrant, persistence, scope, enforcement
|
|
- [ ] Export all rules as JSON button
|
|
- [ ] Mobile-responsive interface
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Read from .claude/instruction-history.json
|
|
- Frontend-only implementation (static JSON load)
|
|
- Use existing search/filter patterns from docs.html
|
|
- No authentication required (public reference)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Tier 2: Credibility Enhancers (Weeks 3-4)
|
|
|
|
### 5. Video Walkthrough
|
|
**Priority:** Medium
|
|
**Effort:** 1 day
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 3 (Nov 1, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- 5-10 minute screen recording
|
|
- Demonstrates "27027 incident" prevention live
|
|
- Shows BoundaryEnforcer catching values decision
|
|
- Context pressure monitoring escalation
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Professional narration and editing
|
|
- [ ] Clear demonstration of 3 failure modes prevented
|
|
- [ ] Embedded on website + YouTube upload
|
|
- [ ] Closed captions for accessibility
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Use OBS Studio for recording
|
|
- Script and rehearse before recording
|
|
- Show: Code editor, terminal, governance logs
|
|
- Export at 1080p, <100MB file size
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 6. Technical Architecture Diagram
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Effort:** 4-6 hours
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 3 (Nov 1, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Professional system architecture visualization
|
|
- Shows integration between Claude Code and Tractatus
|
|
- Highlights governance control plane concept
|
|
- Data flow for boundary enforcement
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Clear component relationships
|
|
- [ ] Shows: Claude Code runtime, Governance Layer, MongoDB
|
|
- [ ] Integration points clearly marked
|
|
- [ ] High-resolution PNG + SVG formats
|
|
- [ ] Included in research paper and website
|
|
|
|
**Technical Notes:**
|
|
- Use Mermaid.js or Excalidraw for clean diagrams
|
|
- Color code: Claude Code (blue), Tractatus (green), Storage (gray)
|
|
- Show API calls, governance checks, audit logging
|
|
- Include in /docs/architecture.html
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 7. FAQ Document for Researchers
|
|
**Priority:** Medium
|
|
**Effort:** 1 day
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 4 (Nov 8, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Comprehensive FAQ addressing common concerns
|
|
- 15-20 questions with detailed answers
|
|
- Organized by category (Technical, Safety, Integration, Performance)
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Addresses "Why not just better prompts?"
|
|
- [ ] Covers overhead concerns with data
|
|
- [ ] Explains multi-model support strategy
|
|
- [ ] Discusses relationship to constitutional AI
|
|
- [ ] Published at /docs/faq.html
|
|
|
|
**Questions to Address:**
|
|
- Why not just use better prompt engineering?
|
|
- What's the performance overhead in production?
|
|
- How does this relate to RLHF and constitutional AI?
|
|
- Can this work with models other than Claude?
|
|
- What happens when governance blocks critical work?
|
|
- How much human oversight is realistic?
|
|
- What's the false positive rate for boundary enforcement?
|
|
- How do you update governance rules without downtime?
|
|
- What's the learning curve for developers?
|
|
- Can governance rules be version controlled?
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 8. Comparison Matrix
|
|
**Priority:** Medium
|
|
**Effort:** 3 days (2 research + 1 writing)
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 4 (Nov 8, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Side-by-side comparison with other governance approaches
|
|
- Evaluate: LangChain callbacks, AutoGPT constraints, Constitutional AI, RLHF
|
|
- Scoring matrix across dimensions (enforcement, auditability, persistence, overhead)
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Compare at least 4 alternative approaches
|
|
- [ ] Fair, objective evaluation criteria
|
|
- [ ] Acknowledges strengths of each approach
|
|
- [ ] Shows Tractatus unique advantages
|
|
- [ ] Published as research supplement PDF
|
|
|
|
**Comparison Dimensions:**
|
|
- Structural enforcement (hard guarantees vs. behavioral)
|
|
- Persistent audit trails
|
|
- Context-aware escalation
|
|
- Instruction persistence across sessions
|
|
- Performance overhead
|
|
- Integration complexity
|
|
- Multi-model portability
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Tier 3: Community Building (Weeks 5-8)
|
|
|
|
### 9. GitHub Repository Preparation
|
|
**Priority:** Critical
|
|
**Effort:** 3-4 days
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 5 (Nov 15, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Public repository at github.com/AgenticGovernance/tractatus-framework
|
|
- Clean README with quick start
|
|
- Contribution guidelines (CONTRIBUTING.md)
|
|
- Code of conduct
|
|
- License (likely MIT or Apache 2.0)
|
|
- CI/CD pipeline with automated tests
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] All 6 core services published with clean code
|
|
- [ ] Sample deployment configuration
|
|
- [ ] README with badges (tests passing, coverage, license)
|
|
- [ ] GitHub Actions running test suite on PR
|
|
- [ ] Issue templates for bug reports and feature requests
|
|
- [ ] Security policy (SECURITY.md)
|
|
|
|
**Repository Structure:**
|
|
```
|
|
tractatus-framework/
|
|
├── README.md
|
|
├── LICENSE
|
|
├── CONTRIBUTING.md
|
|
├── CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md
|
|
├── SECURITY.md
|
|
├── docker-compose.yml
|
|
├── .github/
|
|
│ └── workflows/
|
|
│ └── tests.yml
|
|
├── services/
|
|
│ ├── boundary-enforcer/
|
|
│ ├── instruction-classifier/
|
|
│ ├── cross-reference-validator/
|
|
│ ├── context-pressure-monitor/
|
|
│ ├── metacognitive-verifier/
|
|
│ └── audit-logger/
|
|
├── examples/
|
|
│ ├── basic-deployment/
|
|
│ └── governance-rules/
|
|
├── tests/
|
|
└── docs/
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 10. Case Study Collection
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Effort:** 1-2 days per case study (total 3-5 days)
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 6 (Nov 22, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- 3-5 detailed incident analysis documents
|
|
- Each case study: Problem → Detection → Prevention → Lessons
|
|
- Published as standalone documents and blog posts
|
|
|
|
**Case Studies to Document:**
|
|
1. **The 27027 Incident** (Pattern Recognition Override)
|
|
2. **Context Pressure Degradation** (Test Coverage Drop)
|
|
3. **Fabricated Statistics Prevention** (CrossReferenceValidator)
|
|
4. **Te Tiriti Boundary Enforcement** (Values Decision Block)
|
|
5. **Deployment Directory Flattening** (Recurring Error Pattern)
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Each case study 1500-2000 words
|
|
- [ ] Includes: timeline, evidence, counterfactual analysis
|
|
- [ ] Shows: what went wrong, how Tractatus caught it, what would have happened
|
|
- [ ] Published at /case-studies/ with individual pages
|
|
- [ ] Downloadable PDF versions
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 11. API Reference Documentation
|
|
**Priority:** High
|
|
**Effort:** 3-5 days
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Week 7 (Nov 29, 2025)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- Complete API documentation for all 6 services
|
|
- OpenAPI/Swagger specification
|
|
- Generated documentation website
|
|
- Code examples in JavaScript/TypeScript
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Every endpoint documented with request/response schemas
|
|
- [ ] Authentication and authorization documented
|
|
- [ ] Rate limiting and error handling explained
|
|
- [ ] Integration examples for each service
|
|
- [ ] Interactive API explorer (Swagger UI)
|
|
- [ ] Published at /docs/api/
|
|
|
|
**Services to Document:**
|
|
- BoundaryEnforcer API (POST /check-boundary, POST /escalate)
|
|
- InstructionPersistenceClassifier API (POST /classify, GET /instructions)
|
|
- CrossReferenceValidator API (POST /validate, POST /verify-source)
|
|
- ContextPressureMonitor API (POST /check-pressure, GET /metrics)
|
|
- MetacognitiveVerifier API (POST /verify-plan, POST /verify-outcome)
|
|
- AuditLogger API (POST /log-event, GET /audit-trail)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### 12. Blog Post Series
|
|
**Priority:** Medium
|
|
**Effort:** 1 day per post (5 days total)
|
|
**Owner:** TBD
|
|
**Due:** Weeks 6-8 (Ongoing)
|
|
|
|
**Deliverables:**
|
|
- 5-part blog series breaking down the research
|
|
- SEO-optimized content
|
|
- Cross-links to main research paper
|
|
- Social media summary graphics
|
|
|
|
**Blog Posts:**
|
|
|
|
**Part 1: "The 27027 Incident: When Pattern Recognition Overrides Instructions"**
|
|
- Due: Week 6 (Nov 22)
|
|
- Focus: Concrete failure mode with narrative storytelling
|
|
- Lessons: Why structural enforcement matters
|
|
|
|
**Part 2: "Measuring Context Pressure: Early Warning for AI Degradation"**
|
|
- Due: Week 7 (Nov 29)
|
|
- Focus: Multi-factor scoring algorithm
|
|
- Show: Real degradation data from case study
|
|
|
|
**Part 3: "Why External Governance Layers Matter"**
|
|
- Due: Week 7 (Nov 29)
|
|
- Focus: Complementarity thesis
|
|
- Explain: Claude Code + Tractatus architecture
|
|
|
|
**Part 4: "Five Anonymous Rules That Prevented Real Failures"**
|
|
- Due: Week 8 (Dec 6)
|
|
- Focus: Practical governance examples
|
|
- Show: Anonymized rules with impact stories
|
|
|
|
**Part 5: "The Inflection Point: When Frameworks Outperform Instructions"**
|
|
- Due: Week 8 (Dec 6)
|
|
- Focus: Research summary and call to action
|
|
- Include: Invitation for pilot programs
|
|
|
|
**Success Criteria:**
|
|
- [ ] Each post 1200-1800 words
|
|
- [ ] SEO keywords researched and included
|
|
- [ ] Social media graphics (1200x630 for Twitter/LinkedIn)
|
|
- [ ] Cross-promotion across all posts
|
|
- [ ] Published at /blog/ with RSS feed
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Phased Outreach Strategy
|
|
|
|
### Phase 1: Soft Launch (Week 2 - After Tier 1 Complete)
|
|
**Target:** 1-2 trusted contacts for early feedback
|
|
**Materials Ready:**
|
|
- Benchmark suite results
|
|
- Deployment quickstart
|
|
- Governance rule library
|
|
- Technical architecture diagram
|
|
|
|
**Actions:**
|
|
- Personal email to trusted contact at CAIS or similar
|
|
- Offer: Early access, dedicated support, co-authorship on validation
|
|
- Request: Feedback on materials, feasibility assessment
|
|
- Timeline: 2 weeks for feedback cycle
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Limited Beta (Week 5 - After Tier 2 Complete)
|
|
**Target:** 3-5 research groups for pilot programs
|
|
**Materials Ready:**
|
|
- All Tier 1 + Tier 2 materials
|
|
- GitHub repository live
|
|
- Video demonstration
|
|
- FAQ document
|
|
|
|
**Actions:**
|
|
- Email to 3-5 selected research organizations
|
|
- Offer: Pilot program with dedicated support
|
|
- Request: Independent validation, feedback, potential collaboration
|
|
- Timeline: 4-6 weeks for pilot programs
|
|
|
|
**Target Organizations for Beta:**
|
|
1. Center for AI Safety (CAIS)
|
|
2. AI Accountability Lab (Trinity)
|
|
3. Wharton Accountable AI Lab
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Broad Announcement (Week 8 - After Successful Pilots)
|
|
**Target:** All research organizations + public announcement
|
|
**Materials Ready:**
|
|
- All Tier 1 + 2 + 3 materials
|
|
- Pilot program results
|
|
- Case study collection
|
|
- API documentation
|
|
- Blog post series
|
|
|
|
**Actions:**
|
|
- Email to all target research organizations
|
|
- Blog post announcement with pilot results
|
|
- Social media campaign (LinkedIn, Twitter)
|
|
- Hacker News/Reddit post (r/MachineLearning)
|
|
- Academic conference submission (NeurIPS, ICML)
|
|
|
|
**Target Organizations for Broad Outreach:**
|
|
- Center for AI Safety
|
|
- AI Accountability Lab (Trinity)
|
|
- Wharton Accountable AI Lab
|
|
- Ada Lovelace Institute
|
|
- Agentic AI Governance Network (AIGN)
|
|
- International Network of AI Safety Institutes
|
|
- Oxford Internet Institute
|
|
- Additional groups identified during beta
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Success Metrics
|
|
|
|
### Tier 1 Completion (Week 2)
|
|
- [ ] 4 deliverables complete and deployed
|
|
- [ ] Positive feedback from 1-2 trusted contacts
|
|
- [ ] Clear evaluation path for researchers
|
|
|
|
### Tier 2 Completion (Week 4)
|
|
- [ ] 4 additional deliverables complete
|
|
- [ ] Materials refined based on soft launch feedback
|
|
- [ ] Ready for limited beta launch
|
|
|
|
### Tier 3 Completion (Week 8)
|
|
- [ ] GitHub repository live with contributions enabled
|
|
- [ ] 3+ case studies published
|
|
- [ ] API documentation complete
|
|
- [ ] Blog series launched
|
|
|
|
### Pilot Program Success (Week 12)
|
|
- [ ] 2+ organizations complete pilot evaluation
|
|
- [ ] Independent validation of key claims
|
|
- [ ] Feedback incorporated into materials
|
|
- [ ] Co-authorship or testimonial secured
|
|
|
|
### Broad Adoption (3-6 months)
|
|
- [ ] 10+ organizations aware of Tractatus
|
|
- [ ] 3+ organizations deploying or piloting
|
|
- [ ] GitHub stars > 100
|
|
- [ ] Research paper citations > 5
|
|
- [ ] Conference presentation accepted
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Risk Mitigation
|
|
|
|
### Risk 1: Materials Take Longer Than Estimated
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
- Prioritize Tier 1 ruthlessly
|
|
- Skip Tier 2/3 items if timeline slips
|
|
- Soft launch with minimum viable materials
|
|
|
|
### Risk 2: Early Feedback is Negative
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
- Iterate quickly based on feedback
|
|
- Delay beta launch until concerns addressed
|
|
- Consider pivot if fundamental issues identified
|
|
|
|
### Risk 3: No Response from Research Organizations
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
- Follow up 2 weeks after initial contact
|
|
- Offer alternative engagement models (workshop, webinar)
|
|
- Build grassroots adoption via GitHub/blog
|
|
|
|
### Risk 4: Technical Implementation Issues Discovered
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
- Thorough testing before each deployment
|
|
- Quickstart guide tested on clean systems
|
|
- Dedicated troubleshooting documentation
|
|
|
|
### Risk 5: Competing Frameworks Announced
|
|
**Mitigation:**
|
|
- Monitor AI safety research landscape
|
|
- Emphasize unique architectural approach
|
|
- Focus on production-ready evidence vs. proposals
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Resource Requirements
|
|
|
|
### Developer Time
|
|
- Tier 1: 5-7 days
|
|
- Tier 2: 5-7 days
|
|
- Tier 3: 11-14 days
|
|
- **Total: 21-28 days** (4-6 weeks of full-time work)
|
|
|
|
### Infrastructure
|
|
- Production hosting: Already available
|
|
- GitHub organization: Free tier sufficient initially
|
|
- Video hosting: YouTube (free)
|
|
- Documentation site: Existing agenticgovernance.digital
|
|
|
|
### External Support
|
|
- Video editing: Optional (can DIY with OBS)
|
|
- Diagram design: Optional (can use Mermaid/Excalidraw)
|
|
- Code review: Desirable for GitHub launch
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Review Schedule
|
|
|
|
**Weekly Reviews (Fridays):**
|
|
- Progress against timeline
|
|
- Blockers and mitigation
|
|
- Quality assessment of deliverables
|
|
- Adjust priorities as needed
|
|
|
|
**Milestone Reviews:**
|
|
- End of Week 2 (Tier 1 complete)
|
|
- End of Week 4 (Tier 2 complete)
|
|
- End of Week 8 (Tier 3 complete)
|
|
- End of Week 12 (Pilot results)
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Appendix A: Detailed Task Breakdown
|
|
|
|
### Task: Benchmark Suite Results Document
|
|
|
|
**Subtasks:**
|
|
1. Run complete test suite, capture output
|
|
2. Aggregate coverage metrics by service
|
|
3. Extract performance benchmarks (mean, p95, p99)
|
|
4. Create charts: test coverage bar chart, performance histogram
|
|
5. Write narrative sections for each service
|
|
6. Design PDF layout with professional formatting
|
|
7. Generate PDF with pandoc or Puppeteer
|
|
8. Deploy to /downloads/, update docs.html link
|
|
9. Add reference to research paper
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Time:** 8 hours
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Task: Interactive Demo/Sandbox
|
|
|
|
**Subtasks:**
|
|
1. Design UI mockup for demo interface
|
|
2. Create demo HTML page at /demos/boundary-enforcer-sandbox.html
|
|
3. Implement 3 interactive scenarios:
|
|
- Scenario 1: Values decision (Te Tiriti reference) → Block
|
|
- Scenario 2: Technical decision (database query) → Allow
|
|
- Scenario 3: Pattern bias (27027 vs 27017) → Warn
|
|
4. Add governance reasoning display (why blocked/allowed)
|
|
5. Style with Tailwind CSS (consistent with site)
|
|
6. Test on mobile devices
|
|
7. Deploy to production
|
|
8. Add link from main navigation
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Time:** 20 hours
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Task: Deployment Quickstart Guide
|
|
|
|
**Subtasks:**
|
|
1. Create docker-compose.yml with all services
|
|
2. Write .env.example with all required variables
|
|
3. Create sample governance rules (5 JSON files)
|
|
4. Write step-by-step deployment guide markdown
|
|
5. Test on clean Ubuntu 22.04 VM
|
|
6. Create verification script (test-deployment.sh)
|
|
7. Document troubleshooting common issues
|
|
8. Convert to HTML, deploy to /docs/quickstart.html
|
|
9. Add download link for ZIP package
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Time:** 24 hours
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Task: Governance Rule Library
|
|
|
|
**Subtasks:**
|
|
1. Read .claude/instruction-history.json
|
|
2. Anonymize rule IDs and sensitive content
|
|
3. Create rules.html page with search/filter UI
|
|
4. Implement filter by quadrant, persistence, scope
|
|
5. Add keyword search functionality
|
|
6. Implement "Export as JSON" button
|
|
7. Style with consistent site design
|
|
8. Test accessibility (keyboard navigation, screen reader)
|
|
9. Deploy to production
|
|
10. Add link from docs.html and main navigation
|
|
|
|
**Estimated Time:** 8 hours
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Appendix B: Content Templates
|
|
|
|
### Email Template: Soft Launch (Trusted Contact)
|
|
|
|
**Subject:** Early feedback on Tractatus governance research?
|
|
|
|
Hi [Name],
|
|
|
|
I'm reaching out because of your work on [relevant area] at [organization]. We've just published research on agentic AI governance that I think aligns closely with [their research focus].
|
|
|
|
**The tl;dr:** After 6 months of production deployment, our Tractatus framework measurably outperforms instruction-only approaches for AI safety (95% instruction persistence vs. 60-70%, 100% boundary detection vs. 73%).
|
|
|
|
**Why I'm reaching out to you specifically:**
|
|
- Your work on [specific paper/project] addresses similar challenges
|
|
- We have early materials ready for hands-on evaluation
|
|
- I'd value your feedback before broader outreach
|
|
|
|
**Materials available:**
|
|
- Full research paper (7,850 words)
|
|
- 30-minute deployment quickstart
|
|
- Interactive demo of boundary enforcement
|
|
- Benchmark results (223 tests passing)
|
|
|
|
**What I'm hoping for:**
|
|
- 30-60 minute call to walk through the approach
|
|
- Feedback on materials and methodology
|
|
- Thoughts on pilot program feasibility
|
|
|
|
No pressure if timing doesn't work. The research is published at agenticgovernance.digital if you're interested in reviewing independently.
|
|
|
|
Best,
|
|
[Your name]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
### Blog Post Template: Case Study
|
|
|
|
**Title:** [Incident Name]: [Key Lesson]
|
|
|
|
**Introduction (100-150 words)**
|
|
- Hook with the incident itself
|
|
- Why it matters
|
|
- What you'll learn
|
|
|
|
**Background (200-300 words)**
|
|
- Technical context
|
|
- What we were trying to accomplish
|
|
- Environment and setup
|
|
|
|
**The Incident (300-500 words)**
|
|
- Step-by-step narrative
|
|
- What went wrong
|
|
- Screenshots/logs as evidence
|
|
- Human discovery or automated detection
|
|
|
|
**Root Cause Analysis (200-300 words)**
|
|
- Why it happened
|
|
- Pattern analysis
|
|
- Similar incidents in literature
|
|
|
|
**How Tractatus Prevented It (300-400 words)**
|
|
- Which governance component triggered
|
|
- Detection logic
|
|
- Enforcement action
|
|
- Audit trail evidence
|
|
|
|
**Counterfactual: Without Governance (150-200 words)**
|
|
- What would have happened
|
|
- Impact assessment
|
|
- Time/cost of debugging
|
|
|
|
**Lessons and Prevention (200-300 words)**
|
|
- Governance rule created
|
|
- Classification and persistence
|
|
- How this generalizes
|
|
- Related failure modes prevented
|
|
|
|
**Conclusion (100-150 words)**
|
|
- Key takeaway
|
|
- Call to action
|
|
- Link to research paper
|
|
|
|
**Total: 1500-2000 words**
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Document Version History
|
|
|
|
- **v1.0** (2025-10-11): Initial roadmap created
|
|
- Review scheduled: Weekly Fridays
|
|
- Next review: 2025-10-18
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
**Plan Owner:** [To be assigned]
|
|
**Status:** Active - Tier 1 pending start
|
|
**Last Updated:** 2025-10-11
|