# Model Dependency Map ## 1. Purpose This file tracks relationships among models in the CCPE model library. It answers: ```text Which models depend on which? Which models derive from which? Which models overlap? Which models conflict? Which models should be merged? Which models have been deprecated or replaced? ``` This file is especially important when the library contains many models. ## 2. Relationship Types Use these relationship types: ```text parent-model child-model prerequisite derived-model sibling-model overlapping-model conflicting-model merged-into supersedes deprecated-by supports tensions-with ``` ## 3. Mapping Format Use this format for each model: ```md ## {model-id} ### Parent Models ### Child Models / Derived Models ### Prerequisites ### Sibling Models ### Overlapping Models ### Conflicting Models ### Supports ### Tensions ### Notes ``` ## 4. Initial Map ### cognitive-imaging #### Parent Models Conceptual parent models: ```text prediction-error free-energy-principle algorithmic-compression causal-intervention complex-adaptive-systems orthogonal-modeling ``` Status: ```text active model relationship; conceptual dependencies are not all standalone Model Cards yet ``` #### Child Models / Derived Models Potential child or derived procedures: ```text prediction-error-capture darkroom-suspension multi-filter-enlarger do-operator-test conspiracy-breaker-check cognitive-development-report ``` Status: ```text candidate procedures; most should become Skills only if Codex invocation or cross-agent reuse is needed ``` #### Prerequisites ```text Understanding of complex adaptive systems Ability to distinguish correlation from causation Awareness of model falsifiability Tolerance for suspended judgment ``` #### Sibling Models ```text cognitive-prism giant-cognition ``` Status: ```text candidate sibling relationship; needs user confirmation ``` #### Overlapping Models ```text systems-thinking argument-compression causal-analysis ``` Status: ```text external or candidate internal relationships ``` #### Conflicting Models ```text TBD ``` #### Supports ```text cognitive-imaging.skill.md model-cards/intermediate/cognitive-imaging-model.md agents/lite/cognitive-imaging-practitioner.prompt.md article-review-committee.runtime.md (future candidate) ``` #### Tensions Potential tensions: ```text May overuse hard-science filters. May mistake anomaly detection for insight. May over-privilege anti-intuitive conclusions. ``` #### Notes Cognitive Imaging appears to function both as an intermediate model and as a workflow model. It now has an active Model Card and an active CCPE-Lite prompt. Skill, Agent Spec, and Runtime expansion is deferred until scenario demand is confirmed. ### giant-cognition #### Parent Models ```text TBD ``` #### Child Models / Derived Models ```text TBD ``` #### Prerequisites ```text TBD ``` #### Sibling Models ```text cognitive-imaging cognitive-prism ``` #### Overlapping Models ```text TBD ``` #### Conflicting Models ```text TBD ``` #### Supports ```text model-cards/applied/giant-cognition-model.md agents/lite/giant-cognition.prompt.md review-committee.runtime.md (future candidate) ``` #### Tensions ```text May become too template-heavy if every review forces a full L0-L4 scan. May over-emphasize cognitive architecture when a task only needs factual correction or light editing. May confuse metaphorical model structure with empirical mechanism if used without boundary discipline. ``` #### Notes Candidate applied model extracted from 《构建你自己的巨人 2.0》 and 巨人认知智能体2.2. Current target form is Model Card + CCPE-Lite. Skill, Agent Spec, and Runtime conversion are deferred. ### cognitive-prism #### Parent Models ```text TBD ``` #### Child Models / Derived Models ```text TBD ``` #### Prerequisites ```text TBD ``` #### Sibling Models ```text cognitive-imaging giant-cognition ``` #### Overlapping Models ```text TBD ``` #### Conflicting Models ```text TBD ``` #### Supports ```text TBD ``` #### Tensions ```text TBD ``` #### Notes Candidate model. Requires source review and Model Mining. ## 5. Dependency Review Checklist When adding or updating relationships, ask: ```text Is this a real dependency or just thematic similarity? Does one model require the other? Is one model a procedure derived from another? Are these two models actually duplicates? Is the relationship confirmed by source material? Does the user need to confirm this relationship? ``` ## 6. Candidate Relationship Policy When uncertain, mark relationship as: ```text candidate relationship ``` Do not treat uncertain dependencies as canonical. ## 7. Merge Review Policy Consider merge review when: ```text Two models share the same mechanism. Two models differ only in name. One model is a subroutine of another. A candidate model is better represented as a Skill. ``` Do not merge when: ```text Two models share vocabulary but solve different problems. Two models share metaphor but have different mechanisms. One is a foundational model and the other is an applied model. ``` ## 8. Final Rule Dependency mapping should reveal the architecture of the user's thinking. It should not create artificial order where the model relationships are still uncertain.