Keeping knowledge with its grounds
Can a record retain not just what it says, but the relations, sources and validity conditions governing its use? Work under the Örgü name addresses different parts of this question.
A relational research kernel
The status report dated 14 September describes pattern extraction in defined relational languages, selection of evidence separating competing explanations and controls on use after grounds change. The reported results concern narrow synthetic tasks, not open-ended representation generation or broad cross-domain generalisation.
An important negative lesson is that agreement between explanations, one remaining candidate or reduced uncertainty does not guarantee real-world correctness. Shared wrong assumptions need separate testing.
A research-notebook prototype
A separate local tool stores versioned text sources, supports review beside the source and links corrections to records. Source changes send records from the old version back for review.
Review approval is not scientific validation. Search is text matching in this version; language-independent meaning learning, team permissions and cloud operation are not established capabilities.
The limit of a shared name
The kernel, notebook and executor are not one completed product. Shared design questions with BMK do not transfer evidence between these mechanisms.
Sources and open work
Sources reviewed on 14 October 2026: the Örgü status report (14 September) and notebook README. Tests were not rerun for this entry. A shared contract, external comparisons and a human pilot remain separate evaluation tasks.
- Question ●
- Model ●
- Experiment ●
- Evaluation ○