Purpose
A single registry of all Authority Pattern Library context codes and pattern names. This registry governs uniqueness and consistency across the public context corpus.
Boundary
This registry is descriptive only. It does not provide recommendations, assessments, case studies, maturity models, assurance opinions, or claims about any organisation.
Registry
Context Code | Pattern Name | Layer (Structural layer) | Primary Condition | Institutional Behaviour (Observable) | Execution Question | Canonical Parent | Related Patterns | Status | Page |
AA-01 | Authority Before Action as a Structural Constraint | Foundational Authority Constraint | Authority unresolved at decision time | Compensating controls and substitution | Is authority explicit and resolvable before action is permitted to bind consequence? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-02, AA-07, AA-09, AA-10, AA-11, AA-12, AA-13 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-02 | Execution Sovereignty Failure | Foundational Authority Constraint | Refusal not enforceable at execution boundary | Continued execution after authority loss | Can execution be refused or halted when authority is no longer effective? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-05, AA-09, AA-11 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-03 | Ontology vs Embedding — Why structure does not imply authority | Foundational Authority Constraint | Structure mistaken for permission | Explanations treated as mandate | Is permission to act being inferred from structure/explanation rather than resolved as authority at the execution boundary? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-14, AA-04 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-04 | Authority Regimes in Agentic Systems | Foundational Authority Constraint | Authority regime ambiguity under agentic execution | Post-hoc reconstruction and overreach risk | Before an agent initiates action, is the relevant authority regime explicit, bounded, and verifiable at the execution boundary? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-11, AA-03 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-05 | Non-Action as a Valid Control Outcome | Foundational Authority Constraint | Unresolved authority conditions | Refusal or pause as outcome | Is non-action available as a legitimate control outcome when admissibility cannot be proven at T=0? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-02, AA-15 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-06 | Frontline Discretion Without Machine-Expressible Authority | Downstream Symptom | Authority not machine-expressible at the execution boundary | Discretion under ambiguity | Is frontline discretion being used to bridge an authority gap that is not representable or verifiable at runtime? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-07, AA-01, AA-09 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-07 | Escalation as a Symptom of Missing Authority | Downstream Symptom | Authority not machine-expressible at the execution boundary | Escalation chains | Is escalation being used to substitute for explicit, machine-verifiable authority at the point where consequence binds? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-08, AA-09, AA-06 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-08 | Shadow Authority Formation | Authority Failure Mode | Authority undefined at commitment boundary | Informal gatekeeping and overrides | Where does permission get reconstructed when authority is not machine-expressible at the point where consequence binds? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-10, AA-07, AA-09 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-09 | Audit and Review as Post-Hoc Authority Reconstruction | Authority Failure Mode | Authority not evidenced at decision time | Retrospective review and dispute | If asked later, can the institution prove why execution was permitted at the commit boundary (T=0), rather than reconstructing permission after the fact? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-10, AA-13, AA-11 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-10 | Authority Drift | Authority Failure Mode | Declared authority diverges from execution surfaces over time | Inconsistent approvals and workarounds | Has effective authority drifted from declared authority at the execution surface where consequence binds? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-11, AA-07, AA-09, AA-08 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-11 | Decision–Execution Decoupling | Foundational Authority Constraint | Decision outputs detached from execution surfaces | Triggers execute without authority verification | Is an upstream decision artifact being treated as permission to execute downstream? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-02, AA-07, AA-10 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-12 | Governance Saturation Boundary (When Governance Is No Longer Enough) | Boundary Condition | Authority cannot be determined through post-hoc controls | Governance expansion without permission resolution | Can governance determine permission to act at execution, or only explain outcomes after the fact? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-09, AA-11 | Abstract boundary | |
AA-13 | Authority Without Traceability | Authority Failure Mode | Authority validated without preserved evidence path | Narrative reconstruction during audit | If asked later, can the institution reconstruct and prove how authority was determined at T=0? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-09, AA-14 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-14 | Explanation Is Not Authority | Core Authority Failure | Explanation substituted for permission | Justification after execution | Is an explanation being treated as a substitute for execution permission at T=0? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-09, AA-13 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-19 | Context Is Not Authority | Core Authority Failure | Context substituted for permission | Context packages, AI-generated summaries, recommendations, interpretations, or situational frames treated as permission to proceed | At the commit boundary (T=0), is contextual interpretation being treated as authority to execute rather than requiring admissibility to be resolved? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-14, AA-15, AA-03, AA-01, AA-18 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-15 | Caution Is Not Governance | Core Authority Failure | Caution substituted for governance | Restraint and explanation used as control | Is caution being used in place of admissibility and authority at the execution boundary (T=0)? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-12, AA-05 | Abstract pattern | |
AA-16 | Claims & Disputes as an Authority Coherence Problem | Applied Pattern | Interpretive permission not stabilised | Disputes, escalation, and review growth | Is interpretive permission stabilised and enforceable at the point where entitlements bind, or reconstructed through dispute and review? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-07, AA-09, AA-06 | Applied Pattern | |
AA-17 | Entitlements Without Authority | Applied Pattern | Entitlements regulate access, but do not resolve authority at the commitment boundary | Actions proceed under policy permission; accountability is reconstructed after impact | At the point consequence binds, is authority explicitly resolved — or is entitlement permission being treated as authority to act? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-11, AA-10, AA-09 | Applied Pattern | No access |
AA-18 | Execution Attribution Collapse | Core Authority Failure | Authority cannot be reconstructed at execution | Process remains visible and logged, but the institution cannot reconstruct a defensible chain from authorised judgment to consequence-binding execution at T=0 | If asked later, can the institution prove why execution was permitted at T=0 — or only show that process occurred? | Authority Pattern Library | AA-01, AA-09, AA-11, AA-14 | Abstract pattern |
Applied operating contexts (AOC codes)
Applied Operating Contexts are sector- or environment-specific manifestations of the AA structural patterns. They use the AOC-\* namespace.
Context Code | Pattern Name | Structural Layer | Primary Condition | Institutional Behaviour | Execution Question | Status | Page |
AOC-01 | First Super — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Distributed execution with central responsibility and trustee accountability | Judgement and coordination substitute where authority and escalation are implicit | In a distributed execution environment, is authority explicit and verifiable before actions bind member-impacting consequence? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-02 | Large Diversified Financial Group — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Multi-entity governance with shared services and distributed execution boundaries | Cross-entity coordination and escalation under pressure; authority assumptions vary by execution path | Across entity and platform boundaries, can the group demonstrate where authority sits at the commitment boundary for each consequence surface? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-03 | Large Insurance-Led Financial Group — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Long-tail liabilities with distributed execution across providers and time | Exception handling and escalation substitute where authority over time is implicit | When decisions unfold over long-tail liability horizons, is authority explicit and traceable at the point each binding commitment occurs? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-04 | Dual Sovereignty Boundary — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Signal/recommendation sovereignty separated from execution authority and accountability | Responsibility blurs; decisions become difficult to defend after the fact | When intelligence crosses sovereignty boundaries, is authority to execute explicit, bounded, and verifiable before action is permitted to bind? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-05 | Large Statutory Service Delivery Agency — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Legislated mandate with high-volume citizen consequence and constrained discretion | Exceptions handled through escalation, discretion, and post-hoc reconstruction when authority is implicit at runtime | For citizen-impacting commitments, is authority explicit and verifiable at the payment/entitlement execution boundary? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-06 | Sovereign State–Led Digital & AI Capability — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Centralised sovereign intent with distributed execution across ministries and partners | Coordination and legitimacy management substitute where execution authority boundaries are implicit at machine speed | In sovereign digital initiatives, is authority explicit and verifiable before AI-enabled execution is permitted to bind public consequence? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-07 | Defence-Adjacent Sovereign Capability — Operating Context | Applied Operating Context | Non-delegable sovereign responsibility under uncertainty, with distributed execution | Authority assumed by systems/intermediaries unless explicitly governed; high sensitivity to trust and lawful use | Under uncertainty and national consequence, is authority explicit and verifiable before any execution pathway is permitted to bind? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-08 | Regulatory Decision Systems — Context Library | Applied Operating Context | Regulatory decisions bind public outcomes; authority must be admissible at publication/execution boundary | Authority is assumed between decision formation and real-world effect unless governed at execution | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where a regulatory decision becomes public effect? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-09 | Banking — Payments & Lending — Context Library | Applied Operating Context | Financial actions bind obligation/state; authority must be admissible at payment/obligation boundary | Authority is assumed between approval and execution unless governed at execution | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where money moves or obligations are created? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-10 | Public Sector Payments & Entitlements — Context Library | Applied Operating Context | Eligibility decisions bind public disbursement; authority must be admissible at payment/entitlement boundary | Eligibility is treated as permission unless governed at disbursement execution | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where eligibility becomes a binding public payment or entitlement? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-11 | SCIA in the National Electricity Market | Applied Operating Context | Automation operates within pre-defined authority boundaries in a real-time critical infrastructure market | Optimisation signals remain subordinate to explicit dispatch authority; evidence is produced before action | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where operational decisions become real-world dispatch and settlement effects? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-12 | Authority and Automation in Real-Time Payments | Applied Operating Context | Irreversible settlement at machine speed requires authority to be resolved before execution | Optimisation and scoring signals are treated as structural inputs, not permission to act | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where a payment is permitted to clear and settle? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-13 | Authority and Automation in Public-Sector Payments | Applied Operating Context | Statutory disbursement authority requires admissibility at the point of payment/suspension | Eligibility logic is treated as permission unless authority is governed at execution | Is authority explicit and verifiable at the boundary where an eligibility determination becomes a binding public disbursement (or suspension)? | Applied Operating Context | |
AOC-14 | Service-Intensive Statutory Delivery — Payments, Claims & Entitlements | Applied Operating Context | High-volume statutory commitments with time-critical citizen consequence | Exceptions concentrate interpretive pressure; review and dispute surfaces expand under uncertainty | At the point payments/entitlements bind, is authority explicit and verifiable for standard cases and bounded exceptions? | Applied Operating Context | No access |
AOC-15 | Frontline-Intensive Statutory Delivery — Call Centres & Case Work | Applied Operating Context | Human interaction is the primary execution interface for exceptions and ambiguity | Discretion, escalation, and reinterpretation concentrate at the frontline | When judgement is unavoidable, is the authority boundary explicit and supported (so discretion is bounded rather than substituting for authority)? | Applied Operating Context | No access |
AOC-16 | Frontline → Policy Feedback Loop | Applied Operating Context | Policy intent depends on how frontline experience is heard, aggregated, and interpreted | Repeated edge cases recur when feedback loops are implicit or slow | Is there an explicit authority-bearing mechanism for translating frontline experience into policy meaning before it becomes operational practice? | Applied Operating Context | No access |
Owner review required
- Confirm AOC numbering and whether any additional operating-context pages should be included in the AOC namespace.
- Confirm that any remaining “legacy” references in operating-context pages should be repointed to AA-01 (canonical) rather than a legacy stub page.