Deontic Models

Conflict Detection Trace

Opposed deontic labels become review cues in the toy model. Honesty note: simplified stated-rule deontic model with jurisdiction and as-of caveats; the pinned first step carries the full honesty note.

highlighted = computed this step

Deontic model honesty note

Honesty note: simplified stated-rule deontic model; jurisdiction and as-of caveats apply; as of June 24, 2026; not legal advice; code encodes a stated-rule interpretation, not the law itself; no neochart dependency.

deontic model as of June24,2026\text{deontic model as of }June 24, 2026

Scan labels for conflicts

The stated process scans deontic rows for the same actor and action with opposed label types.

same actor action scan\text{same actor action scan}

Example conflict packet

The toy rows put actor alpha and action send notice in both an obligation label row and a prohibition label row.

actor alpha send notice\text{actor alpha send notice}

The scan recomputes review cues

The scan finds 1 conflict pair and the trace has 1 conflict row.

conflict pairs=1,conflict rows=1\text{conflict pairs}=1,\quad \text{conflict rows}=1

Diagram note

The diagram is a conflict trace. Conflict is a toy review cue, not a legal conclusion about any real duty or limit.

conflict review cue\text{conflict review cue}

Jurisdiction: US; as of 2026-06-24; not legal advice; Code encodes a stated-rule label workflow, not the law itself.

Conflict detection trace same_actor_action: satisfied via same_actor_action=True compare=True opposed_deontic_labels: conflict via opposed_labels=conflict compare=True review_label: unknown via review_label=None compare=True

Summary

Conflict scans are useful when they point reviewers to opposed labels without resolving the legal meaning.

opposed labels to review\text{opposed labels to review}