Doctrine

Interpretive configurations of IIP-Scoring™

This doctrinal note describes the interpretive configurations used to read IIP-Scoring results and to separate distortion patterns from response regimes.

EN FR
CollectionDoctrine
TypeDoctrine
Layertransversal
Version1.0
Levelnormatif
Published2026-02-14
Updated2026-02-26

Interpretive configurations of IIP-Scoring™

IIP-Scoring™ should not be read as a single scalar truth. It must be interpreted through configurations that describe how the system relates to the canon, to perimeter constraints, and to response conditions.

A configuration is therefore not a score. It is a governed reading regime for the score and its evidence.


Why configurations matter

The same numerical signal can correspond to different realities: perimeter omission, authority drift, weak traceability, unstable activation, or governed abstention. Configurations prevent the score from becoming a flattened verdict.


Minimum configurations

  • anchored configuration: the answer remains inside the canon and preserves explicit bounds;
  • drift configuration: the answer remains plausible but moves away from the canonical perimeter;
  • silence configuration: the correct outcome is a legitimate non-response or a clarification request;
  • instability configuration: the answer changes materially across prompts or contexts.

Operational consequence

Configurations make IIP-Scoring readable in governance terms. They tell whether the issue concerns fidelity, authority, perimeter, stability, or abstention — not merely whether the result is numerically high or low.