# Gate 2A Intention and Exceptional-Condition Flows

These are behavioral flows, not screens. Each preserves one active Realm, one current Focus, one dominant conversation, and one continuous thread. Three flows are expanded as primary storyboards and three as essential-exception storyboards; the other twelve remain concise.

## A. Inner Clinic

### A-I1 — Primary storyboard: understand a complex post-surgery record

**Presence:** patient; named clinician participates through an authorized Relationship  
**Focus:** “Help me understand what the surgeon found and what the stents are doing.”  
**Starting authority:** patient authorizes specified records for this purpose; clinician review authority is verified  
**Result:** clinician-reviewed explanatory Scene plus source/review Record

1. **Private start.** The patient asks Ki from Inner Clinic. Ki says which dated records are available and that it can explain documented material but cannot diagnose or predict.
2. **Source check.** Clinical Source Sentinel separates operative findings, imaging, pathology, later clinician notes, and missing/contradictory fields. The patient can inspect why each Source is eligible.
3. **Scene proposal.** Ki explains why a spatial/temporal Scene may be clearer than text and previews the exact source set, purpose, visibility, patient consent, clinician reviewer, unknowns, and Compute estimate.
4. **Deliberate Gate.** The patient approves generation for the patient–clinician Relationship only. Missing clinical authority or consent blocks generation.
5. **Bounded draft.** The Scene Composer produces observed/documented, clinician-interpretation, illustrative-anatomy, uncertainty, and progression layers. It does not interpolate undocumented disease or treatment effects.
6. **Clinician review.** The clinician accepts, corrects, or annotates the representation. A correction changes the Scene version without overwriting the original records.
7. **Patient conversation.** Ki walks through the approved Scene, answers source-grounded questions, and flags questions that belong to the clinician.
8. **Return.** The Portal returns to the same conversation with the Scene attached, next clinical questions, and the review/consent/source manifest Record.

### A-I2 — Current research synthesis for a patient or donor

1. Presence asks a research question and selects patient, donor, or general-learning context.
2. Research Worker retrieves eligible current Sources and separates accepted, emerging, disputed, and retracted evidence.
3. Ki gives a comprehensible answer with date, scope, uncertainty, and named gaps.
4. If a clinical question is personal, Ki narrows the answer and routes it to a clinician rather than applying population research.
5. Presence may save the answer privately or propose a separate question/contribution to a Community.
6. The synthesis manifest and later supersession rule persist.

### A-I3 — Contribute research or lived experience at the correct scope

1. Contributor starts from a paper, Institution update, clinician record, or lived-experience Artifact.
2. Ki identifies contribution type and proposes a Contribution Envelope.
3. Contributor selects Personal, Community, Alliance, Institution, or public receiving scope within policy.
4. Relevant steward checks provenance, permitted use, consent, and authority.
5. Acceptance creates reference/candidate/accepted Wisdom only at that scope; rejection leaves the original intact.
6. Submission, review, canonical effect, correction, and withdrawal terms persist.

### A-E1 — Essential-exception storyboard: sources conflict and clinical review is insufficient

**Trigger:** operative note, later imaging, and a draft interpretation disagree about a documented finding.  
**Safety risk:** the Scene could imply a clinical conclusion unsupported by the record.

1. Clinical Source Sentinel marks the exact conflicting claims, dates, and Source authority.
2. Scene generation narrows to uncontested anatomy/findings; disputed regions remain unrendered or visibly uncertain.
3. Ki tells the patient what conflicts, why it matters, and what Kiduna cannot resolve.
4. The initially assigned reviewer lacks authority over one Source; clinician review remains incomplete.
5. The Action is constrained rather than “best guessed.” Ki proposes obtaining clarification from the issuing clinician/Institution.
6. The patient can continue with a limited reviewed explanation, wait, or stop.
7. The conflict, excluded claims, review requests, patient choice, and any later correction become Records.

### A-E2 — Consent is missing or withdrawn

1. Privacy Sentinel detects that consent does not cover the record, receiving scope, Scene, or named reviewer.
2. Work stops before use/disclosure; safe draft metadata may remain quarantined.
3. Ki explains affected material and offers narrower consent or non-personal general information.
4. On withdrawal, future use stops and derivatives are traced under the promised retention/deletion policy.
5. Access changes and downstream exceptions produce a withdrawal Record.

### A-E3 — Request exceeds medical authority or implies urgent risk

1. Presence asks for diagnosis, prognosis, treatment choice, or expresses urgent warning signs.
2. Ki states the boundary and does not convert sources into a clinical determination.
3. For urgent language, Ki prioritizes immediate appropriate human/emergency guidance according to accepted safety policy.
4. For non-urgent questions, Ki prepares a source-linked clinician question or routes to the named care team.
5. No unsafe inference is persisted as Wisdom; routing and acknowledged limitation are recorded.

## B. The Nature of Work

### B-I1 — Contextual coaching during a live transformation moment

1. Participant tells Ki privately: “The leadership team keeps revisiting the same decision.”
2. Ki uses the participant's authorized context plus one relevant OD practice Source, clearly separated.
3. Ki asks developmental questions and helps the participant identify a next move.
4. Private reflection remains Personal; no Organization observer or score is created.
5. Ki may offer to prepare a separate shareable question or insight.
6. Only the previewed contribution can enter the team/Program scope.

### B-I2 — Primary storyboard: contribute and synthesize insight at a chosen scope

**Presence:** Program participant  
**Focus:** “Help the transformation team name what keeps blocking this decision.”  
**Result:** governed team synthesis preserving privacy, dissent, and action boundary

1. **Private reflection.** Ki helps the participant articulate the pattern. It explicitly marks the conversation as private.
2. **Contribution choice.** Ki asks whether to keep it private or prepare a separate shareable contribution. The participant chooses team scope, group attribution, Program-learning use, a review date, and withdrawal terms.
3. **Receiving Gate.** Team steward accepts the contribution into the eligible set. Acceptance does not reveal the private conversation.
4. **Collective work.** Collective Synthesis Worker combines only eligible contributions and approved OD Sources. It states participation limits and preserves two competing interpretations.
5. **Reidentification check.** Privacy Sentinel tests whether examples, team size, or role details could reveal individuals. Unsafe details are generalized or excluded, not silently exposed.
6. **Team conversation.** Ki presents the synthesis as themes, tensions, dissent, missing perspectives, and possible experiments—not “what everyone thinks.”
7. **Action boundary.** A proposed experiment remains a Program Action draft until the named team/Program authority confirms or governs it.
8. **Record.** Eligible-source manifest, exclusions, dissent, acceptance authority, expiry/review date, participant withdrawal path, and Action decision persist.

### B-I3 — Organization learns across Programs without exposing individuals

1. Organization asks a cross-Program question with a declared learning purpose.
2. Each Program offers only eligible syntheses or contributions; private/member context never becomes a source.
3. Collective Synthesis Worker compares patterns and differences without person-level data.
4. Ki states coverage, selection bias, exclusions, and minority positions.
5. Organization governance may adopt an Organization Artifact or policy; source Programs retain their own Records.
6. Later corrections or withdrawal affect future use and are traced.

### B-E1 — Essential-exception storyboard: synthesis could identify a person and erase a minority view

**Trigger:** a team is small; one distinctive example could reveal its contributor, while the majority interpretation omits the contributor's concern.  
**Risk:** reidentification, coerced disclosure, and false consensus.

1. Privacy Sentinel marks the identifying details and blocks the current synthesis from release.
2. Collective Synthesis Worker separates the majority pattern from the minority concern and labels the sample limitation.
3. Ki asks the contributor privately whether a safer abstraction, cloaked attribution, delayed use, or complete exclusion is acceptable. Silence is not consent.
4. If no safe form is accepted, the contribution remains excluded; the synthesis states that relevant input was withheld for privacy without implying agreement.
5. The team steward receives a constrained synthesis, not the protected content.
6. No manager can inspect the private negotiation or infer a person from hidden metadata.
7. The block, chosen treatment, source-set change, dissent, and appeal path become Records.

### B-E2 — Sponsor asks to inspect private Ki conversations or create person scores

1. Ki/Privacy Sentinel identifies the request as outside sponsor authority.
2. Access and scoring are Prohibited regardless of funding or administrative Role.
3. Ki may offer consented aggregate program outcomes that pass anti-reidentification tests.
4. The prohibited request and response are recorded under appropriate confidential governance policy.
5. Participants are notified only if policy, risk, or affected rights require it.

### B-E3 — Requested collective Action exceeds consented scope or Program authority

1. A synthesis recommends an intervention affecting employment, policy, or another Program.
2. Decision/Action Operator checks participant contribution terms and Program authority.
3. Evidence may inform a Proposal, but execution pauses at the required Organization governance Gate.
4. Ineligible personal material is removed from the decision basis.
5. Proposal, exclusions, decision, and appeal/reversal path persist.

## C. 2nd Cavalry Living History, Service, and Connection

### C-I1 — Primary storyboard: veteran contributes an oral history

**Presence:** verified veteran; private identity/service verification is separate from public attribution  
**Focus:** “Record what my crew remembers about 73 Easting before the anniversary.”  
**Result:** preserved original, reviewed transcript, chosen release, and durable provenance

1. **Private beginning.** Ki explains that recording remains private until the veteran reviews a separate contribution and that the veteran may pause, skip, redact, or stop.
2. **Protocol.** Oral History Interview Worker proposes questions, interviewer identity, media format, intended collection, rights/release, chosen attribution, sensitive-topic boundaries, and preservation terms based on accepted archive policy.
3. **Confirmed capture.** The veteran starts the interview. Ki may clarify chronology but does not supply memories or challenge testimony as fact during capture.
4. **Preserve original.** Original media receives a hash, custody record, and private source identity. A draft transcript and metadata are distinct derivatives.
5. **Review.** The veteran corrects transcript errors, selects public/member/group/private visibility, marks sensitive passages, and approves or declines event/location links.
6. **Source review.** Historical Source Sentinel links official records and other testimonies without rewriting this account. Conflicts are marked attributable.
7. **Deliberate release.** The veteran previews exactly what will be contributed. Archive steward accepts custody; editorial authority may curate without converting testimony into official canon.
8. **Record and continuity.** Release, attribution, rights, original/transcript versions, Source links, restrictions, correction/withdrawal limits, and future Scene eligibility persist.

### C-I2 — Explore an event through an evidence-bounded Scene

1. Presence enters a documented historical Project from the current conversation.
2. Ki previews Scene purpose, source set, truth layers, contested areas, rights, and editorial version.
3. Portal preserves Presence/Role, selected Sources, and return context.
4. Scene presents spatial/temporal evidence while distinguishing official Sources, testimony, interpretation, reconstruction, and unknowns.
5. Presence asks questions, compares accounts, and opens original permitted Sources.
6. Returning preserves the conversation, selected moment, annotations, and Scene version.

### C-I3 — Connect service context to benefits, health information, peers, and human help

1. Veteran asks privately; public service identity and health context remain separate.
2. Ki distinguishes official current guidance, benefits rules, peer experience, and clinical advice.
3. Benefits Navigation Worker organizes questions and possible pathways without promising eligibility or diagnosis.
4. Veteran chooses whether to contact an accredited/human resource or opt into a peer connection.
5. Warm handoff reveals only the consented information.
6. Source freshness, handoff, and follow-up state persist privately.

### C-E1 — Essential-exception storyboard: conflicting eyewitness accounts and overconfident reconstruction

**Trigger:** two veterans place a key event differently; the current Scene visually presents one account as settled.  
**Risk:** false historical certainty, erasure, and memorial harm.

1. A contributor attaches a challenge to the exact Scene claim/version.
2. Historical Source Sentinel identifies which Source supported the current representation and links the conflicting testimony.
3. The affected Scene layer is constrained pending review; original Sources remain available within their rights.
4. Scene Composer replaces the settled depiction with explicit alternatives, uncertainty, or an unrendered gap.
5. Editorial Supervisor reviews source authority, chronology, context, and whether the Scene should show multiple paths.
6. Ki tells viewers that the representation changed and why without declaring a veteran unreliable by score or popularity.
7. Prior Scene version, challenge, decision, dissent, corrected version, and appeal persist.

### C-E2 — Rights, consent, or sensitive operational/health information is missing

1. Privacy/Rights Sentinel detects missing release, uncertain rights holder, restricted identity, or sensitive content.
2. Ingest may preserve quarantined original custody, but publication, matching, Scene use, and cross-linking stop.
3. Ki requests the legitimate rights/subject/Association authority or offers a narrower restricted treatment.
4. If unresolved, the item remains restricted or excluded with reason; it is not silently discarded.
5. Custody, restriction, attempted uses, and later resolution persist.

### C-E3 — Identity/provenance is unverifiable or a veteran needs urgent human support

1. For unverified historical contribution, Ki preserves a candidate submission without presenting it as verified or linking identities publicly.
2. For benefits/health/urgent need, Ki does not wait for archive verification to offer safe public/human resources.
3. Identity and service verification remain purpose-specific; low Trust for publication does not deny compassionate contact.
4. Any warm handoff uses minimum necessary information and explicit consent, with appropriate emergency boundaries.
5. Verification, restriction, handoff, and follow-up are recorded separately.

## Cross-flow recovery invariants

- A safe draft is preserved when execution is blocked.
- Original Sources remain distinct from synthesis, interpretation, or Scene.
- Missing authority produces a request, not an inferred approval.
- A withdrawn contribution is traced through promised downstream handling.
- Disagreement remains attributable and correctable.
- The same conversation, Focus, selected Elements, and return context survive interruption.
