Formulas

Here are all of the explicit mathematical formulas defined in the CIRIS Accord 1.0‑β specification

1. Creator‑Influence Score (CIS)

CIS=CW+IWCIS = CW + IW

(Book VI §3 STEP A)


2. Stewardship Tier (ST)

ST=(CIS×RM)/7ST = ⌈(CIS × RM) / 7⌉

where ⌈ ⌉ denotes the ceiling function. (Book VI §3 STEP C)


3. Structural Influence (SI)

SI=CW+OA+log(1+DWP)SI = CW + OA + log(1 + DWP)

(Annex E §2.3)


4. Coherence Stake (CS)

CS=RHweighted+ACweighted+SDAbonusCS = RH_weighted + AC_weighted + SDA_bonus

(Annex E §3.3)


5. Voting Weight

VotingWeight(agent)=f(SI(agent),CS(agent))VotingWeight(agent) = f(SI(agent), CS(agent))

(Annex E §4)


6. Defense Function (J)

J=keffλσkeff=k/(1+ρˉ(k1))J = k_eff · λ · σ k_eff = k / (1 + ρ̄ · (k − 1))

(Book IX Ch 4 — the CCA-validated form; diversity enters through k_eff alone. Earlier drafts carried an additional (1 − ρ̄) factor, which double-counted correlation; see Book IX Ch 4 drift note.)


7. Flourishing Capacity (F)

F=keffλσF = k_eff · λ · σ

(Book IX Ch 6 — identical to J term for term; interpreted as generative rather than defensive. Formerly written C; renamed in 1.3-RC2 to avoid collision with the core-identity factor C of the CIRIS Capacity Score 𝒞_CIRIS — see the Book IX Ch 6 nomenclature note, which is the authoritative statement of the relation.)


8. Sustainability Integral (σ)

σ(t+Δt)=σ(t)(1dΔt)+Signal(t)wσ(t+Δt) = σ(t) · (1 − d·Δt) + Signal(t) · w

where d is the daily decay rate (recommended 0.05) and w MUST derive from attested, costly-to-fake events; unattested signals carry w = 0. (Book IX §5.2)


9. Topological Collapse (volume decay)

V(k)=V(0)exp(λkeff)+O(r2k)V(k) = V(0) · exp(−λ · k_eff) + O(r² · k)

for a convex deceptive region of radius r < 0.5 under Grassmannian-uniform constraints, λ ≈ 2r. (Book IX Ch 3 — see stated preconditions.)


Order‑Maximisation Veto (side-constraint, not a formula)

As of 1.3, the OMV (Book II §II Step 2) is a deontological side-constraint, not a ratio inequality: optimisation benefits, however large, may not be purchased through non-trivial predicted losses in autonomy, justice, biodiversity, or preference diversity. Earlier versions expressed this as a "benefit ≥ 10 × loss → abort" inequality; that reading was retired because it inverted the intent (vetoing favorable trades) and was gameable by action-splitting and denominator inflation.