DKP-7-SCOPE-001

Scope & Limits Protocol

0. Preamble

DKP-7-SCOPE-001 defines the strict applicability boundaries of the Dikenocracy system.

If L0–L4 describe how the system operates, DKP-7-SCOPE-001 defines where the system is allowed to operate — and where it is explicitly forbidden.

This protocol exists to prevent:

silent expansion of authority,

normalization of exceptional execution,

ideological, moral, or security-driven capture,

conversion of technical capability into implicit normative power.

Scope in DKP is not advisory. It is a hard boundary layer.

Any protocol, execution logic, crisis mechanism, defensive action, or economic process operating outside the boundaries defined herein is invalid by definition, regardless of claimed benefit, efficiency, emergency justification, or net-positive utility.

1. Purpose

The purpose of DKP-7-SCOPE-001 is to:

define the maximal and minimal domains of DKP applicability,

prohibit algorithmic governance in domains where formalization causes irreversible harm,

constrain interpretation of axioms, Defense, and Crisis logic,

prevent exceptional execution from producing permanent authority,

guarantee exit, reversibility, and non-capture of the system.

This protocol does not optimize outcomes. It limits power.

2. System Position

DKP-7-SCOPE-001 operates:

Downstream of:

DKP-0-ORACLE-001 (Physical Truth Layer),

DKP-1-AXIOMS-001.

Upstream of:

all L4–L6 protocols.

Binding constraint on:

DKP-3-DEFENSE-001,

DKP-4-CRISIS-001,

DKP-4-UPGRADE-001.

Validation boundary for:

DKP-8-SIMULATION-001,

DKP-8-AUDIT-001.

In case of conflict, DKP-7-SCOPE-001 prevails.

Absence of explicit permission in this protocol SHALL be interpreted as prohibition.

3. Scope Categories

System applicability is classified into four mutually exclusive domains.

S0 — Fully Applicable Domain

Algorithmic governance is permitted and enforceable.

Includes:

physical resource allocation under PTL constraints,

infrastructure coordination and safety execution,

economic settlement and accounting mechanisms,

identity continuity and audit logging,

non-discretionary execution of axioms.

S1 — Conditionally Applicable Domain

Algorithmic governance is permitted only under strict constraints.

Includes:

Defense execution under DKP-3-DEFENSE-001,

Crisis execution under DKP-4-CRISIS-001,

transitional degradation and recovery phases,

temporary suspension of non-essential functions,

emergency prioritization bounded by Axiom A1.

All S1 execution:

MUST be time-limited,

MUST be PTL-anchored,

MUST be auditable,

MUST degrade toward baseline (S0),

MUST NOT generate normative precedent.

Physical Inevitability Constraint

PTL-confirmed Vectors of Physical Inevitability MAY justify immediate defensive or crisis actions within S1, but SHALL NOT:

expand DKP applicability into new domains,

justify persistent S1 execution,

trigger automatic scope elevation beyond an explicitly declared Crisis Scope.

S2 — Restricted Domain

Algorithmic governance is partially prohibited.

Includes:

cultural expression and symbolic systems,

belief, ideology, religion, and worldview formation,

education beyond system literacy and verification rights,

artistic, linguistic, and meaning-making processes.

Within S2:

DKP MAY provide verification, factual grounding, and access to knowledge infrastructure,

DKP MUST provide tools for learning and validation,

DKP SHALL NOT define curricula or learning objectives,

DKP SHALL NOT rank, normalize, or optimize cultural or ideological content,

DKP SHALL NOT enforce behavioral or cognitive conformity.

S3 — Prohibited Domain

Algorithmic governance is explicitly forbidden.

Includes:

moral valuation or ranking of individual human lives,

utilitarian trade-offs of existence (“who should live”),

coercive belief shaping or ideological enforcement,

irreversible identity modification,

permanent suspension of exit rights,

formalization, optimization, ranking, enforcement, or algorithmic adjudication of private personal relationships, including friendship, love, family bonds, intimate relations, consent, and matters of conscience or faith,

creation of discretionary emergency authorities.

Any attempt to execute DKP logic within S3 constitutes a critical system violation.

4. Axiom Interpretation Constraint

Axioms define absolute boundaries.

Accordingly:

axioms SHALL NOT be interpreted by operational, economic, enforcement, Defense, Crisis, or optimization protocols,

axioms SHALL NOT be re-weighted, parameterized, or balanced against secondary objectives.

Interpretation of “minimum required conditions” under Axiom A1 is permitted only within an explicitly declared Crisis Scope.

For avoidance of doubt:

Crisis Scope is defined and activated only by DKP-4-CRISIS-001,

its permissible interpretation space is strictly bounded by DKP-7-SCOPE-001,

no other protocol may invoke, extend, simulate, or analogize “minimum required conditions” logic outside that bounded Crisis Scope.

Outside Crisis Scope:

axioms are executed, not interpreted.

5. Crisis Scope

Crisis Scope is a bounded sub-domain of S1.

Crisis Scope SHALL be entered only through the state machine and entry conditions of DKP-4-CRISIS-001.

Any attempt to enter Crisis Scope by inference, repetition, ambiguity, or downstream protocol logic constitutes a Scope violation.

Within Crisis Scope:

execution is survival-oriented,

authority is minimized,

reversibility has priority over optimization,

no permanent state change is permitted.

Crisis Scope explicitly forbids:

creation of new rights,

extension of authority duration,

modification of axioms,

generation of normative precedent,

implicit policy formation through repeated practice.

Post-Crisis Collapse Requirement

Upon PTL-confirmed satisfaction of DKP-4-CRISIS-001 exit conditions, Crisis Scope SHALL automatically collapse to S0.

Persistence of S1 execution beyond validated Crisis exit conditions constitutes a Scope violation.

6. Authority Decay Principle

Any temporary authority, elevated control surface, or exceptional execution path:

MUST be explicitly scoped,

MUST be time-bounded,

MUST decay over time,

MUST collapse to baseline execution upon stabilization.

No authority may be self-extending.

Persistence of authority requires:

renewed PTL-anchored justification,

mandatory validation under DKP-8-SIMULATION-001.

7. Defense Neutralization Boundary

Physical neutralization of a harm source performed under DKP-3-DEFENSE-001 or DKP-4-CRISIS-001:

SHALL be treated strictly as a physical harm-interruption action,

SHALL NOT expand DKP jurisdiction or applicability,

SHALL NOT convert the neutralized location, system, or territory into S0 or S1,

SHALL NOT create implicit governance, control, or normative authority.

Neutralization terminates harm. It does not extend scope.

8. Non-Expansion and Anti-Gaslighting Safeguards

DKP execution SHALL NOT expand its scope by:

repeated crisis activation,

cumulative temporary measures,

statistical normalization of exceptions,

reinterpretation of edge cases,

omission, ambiguity, or silence.

Scope Escalation Safeguard

Any claimed divergence between PTL sensor outputs and observable physical reality, reported by a threshold number of Subjects, SHALL trigger a Scope Audit.

Such audit:

SHALL block transition from S0 to S1,

SHALL require confirmation by independent PTL nodes,

SHALL reject escalation based on single-sensor classes, isolated regions, or non-reproducible signals.

9. Exit and Non-Capture Guarantee

The right of exit is fundamental.

Accordingly:

exit SHALL NOT be conditioned on compliance,

exit SHALL NOT be delayed for optimization or stability goals,

exit SHALL NOT be suspended except temporarily within Crisis Scope to preserve immediate life.

Silent Exit Guarantee

The right of exit includes the right to receive a physically detachable equivalent of assets recorded under L2 protocols.

Such exit settlement:

SHALL NOT depend on continued DKP execution,

SHALL NOT require post-exit compliance,

SHALL be deliverable in non-protocol-bound form.

Economic friction SHALL NOT be used as a de facto restriction of exit.

Permanent restriction of exit constitutes system capture.

10. Transparency Boundary

Transparency obligations are scoped.

DKP guarantees:

access to verification mechanisms,

access to audit trails,

access to counterfactual and failure-mode simulations.

DKP does not guarantee:

human-readable explanation of internal models,

pedagogical simplification of algorithms,

normative justification beyond axiomatic execution.

Verification, not comprehension, is the basis of legitimacy.

11. Enforcement

Any execution exceeding the limits defined in DKP-7-SCOPE-001:

is invalid by definition,

MUST be flagged by audit systems,

MUST trigger containment and review.

Repeated violations constitute a critical system fault.

12. Finality Clause

DKP-7-SCOPE-001 is immutable once frozen.

Any modification requires:

a new protocol identifier,

mandatory simulation under DKP-8-SIMULATION-001,

explicit compatibility declaration across all dependent protocols.

Protocol Hash (SHA-256): [to be inserted at freeze]