EISO-1, using the existing persistent ONUMA identity rather than a TA-14 replacement identifier.
FROZEN PROSPECTIVE INTEROPERABILITY EXAMINATION
Govern the computation.
Then govern the consequence.
Rerun the preserved ONUMA/BIM building-context exercise with TA-14 Admissible Computation Architecture inserted before computational commitment and TA-14 Admissible Execution Architecture retained as the separate downstream execution boundary.
The original evidence path is preserved as the baseline. New results must not be represented as established until the preserved ONUMA inputs are actually run through this examination. Positive, HOLD, DENY, ESCALATE, null and failure outcomes remain admissible.
01 · PRESERVED ORIGINAL EVIDENCE
What the baseline already established.
3593-22778. The first controlled POST returned 500; authoritative RE1 floor/space identity was retrieved, mapping corrected, and the next POST succeeded.
The technician-side workflow reached EC2-131 Fire Control Room with an instruction to check the room. Physical condition was not yet established, so the consequence did not inherit standing.
The location was later corrected to MR2-113 – Mech. The earlier completion assertion remained preserved, the work order remained in progress, and TA-14 maintained HOLD pending independent physical verification of the corrected target.
02 · RERUN CHAIN
One building reality. Two independent governance boundaries.
ONUMA/BIM remains the building-context architecture. ACA does not become BIM. AEA does not become BIM. ONUMA does not become TA-14. Each architecture preserves its native role, provenance and authority.
03 · FROZEN PROPOSITION
Can the same preserved ONUMA/BIM context pass through governance before computation and governance before execution without either TA-14 architecture rewriting ONUMA reality to manufacture a result?
The examination is consequence-bound. It does not claim universal BIM governance, universal computational savings, or that ONUMA supplies execution authority. It tests bounded interoperability around preserved building context.
04 · TEST MATRIX
Four tests. No result is preselected.
Preserved baseline
Input: EISO-1 / ONUMA persistent identity / preserved RE1 context
ACA: Evaluate present computational standing before any new computation
AEA: Evaluate execution standing independently
Expected rule: Evidence decides
Changed-context before compute
Input: Material building/object/work-order context changes before computational commitment
ACA: Revalidate; no inherited computational standing
AEA: NOT REACHED unless computation earns standing
Expected rule: HOLD / DENY / ESCALATE if standing is defeated
Changed-context after compute
Input: Computation earns standing, then a material execution condition changes
ACA: Preserve completed computational determination
AEA: Independently revalidate execution standing
Expected rule: No automatic execution from valid computation
Sovereignty control
Input: ONUMA context conflicts with a desired TA-14 outcome
ACA: Consume attributable context without rewriting it
AEA: Preserve divergence and determine standing
Expected rule: No manufactured PASS
05 · COMPUTATIONAL ACCOUNTING
This time, count what happens before compute is spent.
Any resource benefit remains a hypothesis until measured. Avoided computation must be established before making downstream energy, thermal, water, emissions or infrastructure claims.
06 · FREEZE RULES
Do not move the goalposts after the result appears.
Preserve the original ONUMA evidence. Preserve native ONUMA identities. Do not silently repair conflicting context. Do not change ACA or AEA decision logic after seeing a result. Material change requires revalidation. A valid computational result does not automatically create execution authority. Publish failures and null findings with the same evidentiary discipline as positive findings.