# Intellectual Archaeology

model_id: intellectual_archaeology
file: models/intellectual-archaeology.md
runtime_scope: minimal_v0
governance_level: draft_callable
status: callable
model_level: L2_callable_model
default_role: depth_model
allowed_roles: depth_model, primary_model
reader_translation_required: true

## One-Sentence Definition

Intellectual Archaeology is a depth-processing model that drills from surface application down through deeper structural layers to expose hidden assumptions, core mechanisms, and action-relevant boundaries.

## Runtime Role

Intellectual Archaeology is the first deep-processing engine in this project.

It is not a front router, not a summary format, and not a default response style. It should be called only when Intake and QPI indicate that deeper modeling is worth the cost.

## Core Question

What deeper structural assumptions make this issue, model, or judgment work, and at what depth does further excavation stop changing the decision?

## Layer Framework

The model uses seven possible layers:

1. `application`: surface task, tool, behavior, or symptom.
2. `domain`: domain topology, evaluation frame, actors, and constraints.
3. `process`: time evolution, feedback, lifecycle, and path dependence.
4. `purpose`: value target, tradeoff, stakeholder balance, and QPI alignment.
5. `core_mechanism`: generative mechanism, system dynamics, and causal structure.
6. `human_capability`: cognitive, biological, organizational, or skill limits.
7. `philosophical_bedrock`: basic assumptions about reality, meaning, order, and agency.

## Minimum Sufficient Depth

Do not automatically drill to the deepest layer.

Continue deeper only if it changes at least one of:

- judgment;
- solution path;
- evidence requirement;
- risk weighting;
- action boundary;
- reusable model asset decision.

## Call When

- QPI classifies the input as a medium/heavy `problem` or `issue`.
- A surface explanation keeps failing.
- The issue has high reuse value.
- The owner wants to extract a model from source material.
- The problem needs hidden assumptions made explicit.
- A model or product logic needs depth inspection.

## Do Not Call When

- The input is a fact lookup.
- The user needs a short execution answer.
- There is not enough source material to distinguish mechanism from speculation.
- Deeper analysis will not change judgment or action.
- The user explicitly asks not to enter depth processing.

## Input Types

- complex issue;
- recurring failure;
- cognitive model draft;
- source article or report for model extraction;
- strategic, product, or organizational reasoning problem;
- hidden-assumption audit.

## Output Contract

Intellectual Archaeology output must include:

- `should_call`;
- `entry_reason`;
- `recommended_max_depth`;
- `layers_to_analyze`;
- `analysis_by_layer`;
- `stop_reason`;
- `no_deeper_reason`;
- `assumptions_by_layer`;
- `core_mechanism_summary`;
- `validation_needed`;
- `action_implication`;
- `reader_translation_notes`.

## Common Misuses

- Using the model as a long summary.
- Forcing every issue to the philosophical layer.
- Producing abstract depth without changing action.
- Ignoring QPI and value-assessment controls.
- Treating internal coherence as real-world validity.
- Forgetting reader translation.

## Source Seed Notes

Seeded from the old Intellectual Archaeology model/card and the seven-layer example report, rewritten for this runtime. Old regression suites, selector gates, review reports, and Local CCRA histories are not migrated.

## Current Limits

This model is callable for manual runtime use, but its depth stops and layer quality require real-run calibration before any upgrade.