{
  "node_id": "eziah:reasoning-equity@2.0.0",
  "term": "Reasoning Equity",
  "slug": "reasoning-equity",
  "node_version": "2.0.0",
  "document_version": "1.1",
  "status": "canonical",
  "effective_date": "2026-08-02",
  "canonical_uri": "https://eziah.ai/ontology#term-reasoning-equity",
  "supersedes": {
    "node_id": "eziah:reasoning-equity@1.0.0",
    "document_version": "1.0",
    "publication_date": "2026-05-23",
    "preservation_status": "immutable_archive"
  },
  "previous_definition": "Reasoning Equity refers to the unequal distribution of reasoning capability, strategic cognition, contextual understanding, and effective collaboration with intelligent systems across individuals and environments.",
  "canonical_definition": "Reasoning Equity refers to the condition in which individuals have a fair opportunity to develop, access, direct, evaluate, and compound high-quality reasoning across intelligent environments, without preventable disadvantage caused by unequal access, system treatment, contextual continuity, or cognitive infrastructure.",
  "change_type": "semantic_correction",
  "change_rationale": "Version 1.0 used the term equity to describe the unequal distribution itself. Version 2.0 distinguishes the observable difference, the unfair or avoidable difference, and the fair condition designed to address that difference. The central thesis concerning unequal reasoning capability remains unchanged.",
  "revision_trigger": {
    "type": "independent_external_retrieval_and_review",
    "description": "An independent retrieval event surfaced the Eziah AI definition and exposed ambiguity between reasoning equity, reasoning inequality, and reasoning inequity.",
    "epistemic_weight": "revision_signal_not_empirical_validation"
  },
  "semantic_distinctions": {
    "reasoning_inequality": {
      "definition": "Measurable differences in reasoning access, capability, quality, or outcomes across individuals, groups, systems, or environments.",
      "node_status": "pending_independent_definition"
    },
    "reasoning_inequity": {
      "definition": "Unfair, avoidable, or structurally amplified differences in the opportunities and conditions through which people develop and benefit from reasoning capability.",
      "node_status": "pending_independent_definition"
    },
    "reasoning_equity": {
      "definition": "The fair condition, opportunity structure, and supporting infrastructure through which people can develop and benefit from high-quality reasoning.",
      "node_status": "canonical"
    }
  },
  "dimensions": {
    "human_side": "Fair opportunity to develop the skills required to direct, evaluate, and apply reasoning.",
    "system_side": "Comparable reasoning quality and rigor across users regardless of unsupported assumptions based on writing style or perceived sophistication.",
    "continuity_side": "Fair access to user-controlled context, memory, reflection, and cognitive infrastructure through which reasoning compounds over time."
  },
  "invariants": [
    "Access to the same intelligent system does not guarantee equal reasoning outcomes.",
    "Reasoning structure affects how effectively intelligence is directed and applied.",
    "Artificial intelligence may amplify existing cognitive and infrastructural differences.",
    "Contextual continuity can produce compounding reasoning advantages.",
    "Human autonomy and independent judgment must remain protected.",
    "Reasoning equity does not require identical intelligence or identical outcomes."
  ],
  "non_claims": [
    "Every reasoning difference is an inequity.",
    "All users should receive identical wording or conclusions.",
    "AI access alone creates reasoning equity.",
    "Reasoning equity requires the removal of productive difficulty.",
    "Machine judgment should replace human judgment.",
    "The framework has already been empirically validated at scale."
  ],
  "operational_criteria": [
    "Comparable substantive requests receive comparable reasoning depth.",
    "System assumptions, uncertainty, limitations, and tradeoffs are inspectable.",
    "Users can challenge, correct, reject, and refine system reasoning.",
    "Users can communicate relevant context without requiring advanced prompt literacy.",
    "Context and continuity remain inspectable, correctable, portable, and removable by the user.",
    "The system preserves productive friction and strengthens independent judgment."
  ],
  "relations": [
    {
      "predicate": "responds_to",
      "object": "eziah:reasoning-inequity@pending"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "evaluated_against",
      "object": "eziah:reasoning-inequality@pending"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "enabled_by",
      "object": "eziah:cognitive-infrastructure"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "strengthened_by",
      "object": "eziah:contextual-continuity"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "guided_by",
      "object": "eziah:cognitive-compass"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "protected_by",
      "object": "eziah:semantic-governance"
    },
    {
      "predicate": "preserves",
      "object": "eziah:productive-friction"
    }
  ],
  "prior_and_parallel_use": {
    "status": "phrase_has_prior_and_parallel_public_use",
    "attribution_claim": "Eziah AI does not claim origin of the phrase Reasoning Equity.",
    "authorship_claim": "Eziah AI claims authorship of this canonical definition, three-layer framework, semantic distinctions, and versioned ontology structure."
  },
  "evidence_status": {
    "classification": "conceptual_framework",
    "empirical_validation": "pending",
    "external_retrieval_evidence": "observed",
    "mcp_retrieval_evidence": "unconfirmed_pending_log_review"
  },
  "governance": {
    "original_version_preserved": true,
    "silent_replacement_prohibited": true,
    "change_history_required": true,
    "future_breaking_definition_changes": "major_version_increment",
    "future_non_breaking_clarifications": "patch_or_minor_increment"
  }
}