# Country Context Composer and Comparative Fairness Report

## Status

Current implementation report for IARPG-OPS-2 2.0.20-wip. The Country Context Composer is a browser-local authoring and review prototype. It creates **proposals**, not live intelligence, legal determinations, country rankings, or verified contemporary country profiles.

## Purpose

Document the design and implementation of the Country Context Composer: a structured bridge from the archival 2025 World Context publication to separately sourced, reviewable current-country proposals. The report defines the four-layer evidence model, source metadata requirements, publication gate, comparative-fairness review, import and export behavior, accessibility output, machine contracts, memory routing, and safety boundaries.

## Scope

This report covers:

- selection of all 195 country-roadmap entries;
- mapping each entry to one or more archival World Context source components;
- visible separation of archival orientation, current observations, analyst assumptions, and fictional gameplay translations;
- required current-context sections and source-by-source metadata;
- deterministic publication and comparative-fairness checks;
- local JSON import, export, unknown-extension preservation, and invalid-input quarantine;
- current-versus-archival truth boundaries;
- public-page, machine-record, search, answer, glossary, sitemap, and UAI integration;
- validation and release implications.

It does not perform web research, authenticate external claims, resolve sovereignty or recognition disputes, provide legal advice, establish geopolitical accuracy, or make a proposal publishable without human source review.

## Executive Summary

The archival World Context publication provides six repeatable orientation lenses—place, people, institutions, economy, infrastructure, and environment—but it cannot safely serve as current country truth. The Country Context Composer therefore treats the archive as a **question generator** and requires a separate, explicitly dated proposal for contemporary claims.

The composer supports all **195 country-roadmap entries**. Every entry retains its archival source routing, including the State of Palestine mapping to the separate West Bank and Gaza Strip source components. The imported Factbook `source_code` remains distinct from the stable `entity_id`, and the eight known source-code collision groups remain visible in the configuration.

The authoring model has four non-interchangeable layers:

1. **Archival orientation** — preserved 2025 source context with field-level time limits.
2. **Current observations** — attributable claims with complete source metadata.
3. **Analyst assumptions** — labeled inferences with rationale, confidence, and a test needed.
4. **Fictional gameplay translations** — design ideas that cite current claim records and explain anti-typecasting safeguards.

A current claim requires a publication date, access date, source identity, source URL, source type, geographic or institutional scope, confidence statement, perspective origin, language, and review state. A proposal cannot pass its deterministic publication gate when it lacks explicit uncertainty, oversight and remedy, rights and affected-community context, source disagreement or missing-evidence treatment, correction history, or at least one non-external perspective.

The comparative-fairness check reviews adjective intensity, unsupported threat framing, uncertainty, rights and oversight coverage, perspective diversity, and evidence burden across locally loaded proposals. It creates editorial findings rather than a country score. No morality, development, stability, threat, loyalty, dangerousness, recruitability, targetability, or protected-characteristic score is generated.

All work is browser-local. The implementation uses no account, analytics, remote storage, external model provider, or third-party runtime. Unknown top-level JSON extensions survive import and export. Invalid input is quarantined under a neutral local label and remains downloadable byte-for-byte rather than being repaired or overwritten.

## Evidence Reviewed

### Archival context and roadmap

- [`world-context-2025.json`](../../../world-context-2025.json)
- [`world-context-2025-index.json`](../../../world-context-2025-index.json)
- [`world-context-2025-audit.json`](../../../world-context-2025-audit.json)
- [`international-coverage.json`](../../../international-coverage.json)
- [World Factbook 2025 Context Integration and Data Quality Report](world-factbook-2025-context-integration-and-data-quality-report.md#findings)

### Composer implementation

- [`country-context-composer.php`](../../../country-context-composer.php)
- [`assets/js/country-context-composer.js`](../../../assets/js/country-context-composer.js)
- [`assets/css/site.css`](../../../assets/css/site.css)
- [`scripts/build_country_context_composer.py`](../../../scripts/build_country_context_composer.py)
- [`country-context-composer-config.json`](../../../country-context-composer-config.json)
- [`country-context-composer-config.schema.json`](../../../country-context-composer-config.schema.json)
- [`country-context-proposal.schema.json`](../../../country-context-proposal.schema.json)
- [`country-context-proposal-example.json`](../../../country-context-proposal-example.json)

### Publication and methodological context

- [International Fairness Methodology](../../../global-methodology.php)
- [Editorial and Evidence Method](../../../editorial.php)
- [Global Intelligence Atlas](../../../global.php)
- [World Context Explorer](../../../world-context.php)
- [Global Alliance and Alignment Atlas](global-alliance-and-alignment-atlas.md#reviewed-synthesis)
- [How Alliances Actually Work](how-alliances-actually-work.md#reviewed-synthesis)
- [Informal Alignments, Patrons, Proxies, Intermediaries, and Issue-Specific Coalitions](informal-alignments-patrons-proxies-intermediaries-and-issue-specific-coalitions.md#reviewed-synthesis)

## Findings

### 1. Archival context and current assessment need separate data structures

A single editable country page would encourage dated source fields to be silently rewritten as contemporary claims. The composer instead displays archival material in a read-only orientation panel and stores current claims in a distinct ledger. No archival fact is copied into the current claim list automatically.

This separation makes provenance visible and prevents a collection year from being mistaken for a verification date. It also permits a current source to disagree with the archive without deleting the historical record.

### 2. Current country context is multidimensional and institutionally plural

The current proposal requires sections for:

- locally used country name and endonym notes;
- research cutoff and scope;
- current institutions;
- practical authority;
- oversight and remedy;
- rights and affected-community context;
- economy and infrastructure conditions;
- environmental constraints;
- relevant alliances and issue-specific relationships;
- explicit disagreements, missing evidence, and uncertainty.

Formal authority and practical authority are deliberately separate. A constitution, statute, treaty, or organizational chart may describe official powers, while implementation can differ across agencies, territories, communities, or time periods.

### 3. Every current claim carries its evidence burden

The claim ledger requires source dates and identity beside the claim itself rather than hiding them in a general bibliography. Source type, scope, confidence, perspective origin, language, and review state travel with the claim. This permits reviewers to distinguish:

- primary or official records from commentary;
- locally authored or local-language perspectives from external analysis;
- country-wide claims from institution-specific or subnational claims;
- verified current findings from disputed, provisional, or superseded material.

The composer does not declare that one source class is sufficient for every question. It exposes the burden so a reviewer can decide whether triangulation is adequate.

### 4. Publication readiness is a gate, not a style badge

A proposal fails the deterministic publication gate when required sections or source metadata are absent. In addition to completeness, the gate requires:

- an explicit uncertainty and missing-evidence statement;
- rights and affected-community context;
- oversight and remedy analysis;
- correction history;
- at least one source perspective that is not solely external to the country or institution;
- current-claim records whose access dates do not exceed the declared research cutoff;
- labeled assumptions and bounded gameplay translations.

Passing the deterministic gate means the record is structurally reviewable. It does **not** mean the claims are factually correct, legally valid, balanced in every language, or approved for publication.

### 5. Comparative fairness must compare methods, not countries

The fairness tool scans locally loaded proposals for differences in:

- adjective intensity;
- threat and danger framing;
- uncertainty language;
- rights, oversight, and remedy coverage;
- affected-community visibility;
- source perspective diversity;
- source and review-record counts.

A finding means the editor should inspect an uneven burden or tone. The tool does not calculate a composite score, rank countries, or equate equal treatment with identical prose. Different evidence can support different conclusions, but the reason for stronger language or harsher fictional consequences must remain attributable and reviewable.

### 6. Context does not establish alignment

The composer repeats the rule that geography, religion, ethnicity, language, demographics, government form, trade volume, one vote, one arms purchase, or one shared adversary does not by itself establish alignment. Relationship claims must identify the domain, formal instrument or observable practice, limitations, disagreement, confidence, and verification date.

This keeps the World Context layer upstream of the Alliance Observatory rather than turning demographic or economic facts into geopolitical inference shortcuts.

### 7. Fictional translation needs its own truth boundary

Gameplay translations cite one or more current claim identifiers but remain explicitly fictional design proposals. Each translation must explain why the mechanic is useful and how it avoids assigning permanent moral, violent, deceptive, weak, unstable, or recruitable characteristics to a country, culture, religion, institution, or population.

A fictional mission may explore institutional friction, contested authority, infrastructure dependency, public legitimacy, or alliance disagreement. It may not convert a current community into a target class or use real-world context as operational guidance.

### 8. Local import and export preserve authorship evidence

Valid JSON imports are normalized into the current editor while preserving unknown top-level extension members. Invalid files are quarantined with the original bytes retained in memory and offered for unchanged download. The application does not repair invalid records silently, infer missing facts, or upload drafts.

The accessible plain-text output provides a non-visual representation of the selected country, proposal state, current claims, assumptions, translations, corrections, and gate findings. Print styles remove controls while retaining the proposal boundary and evidence structure.

### 9. The public site now has a clear context-authoring sequence

The recommended path is:

```text
Archival World Context
→ current-source Country Context proposal
→ relationship and alignment analysis
→ institutional faction design
→ campaign consequence
→ scenario comparison and correction
```

This sequence helps visitors distinguish place-level orientation from current institutional claims, and current claims from fictional system design.

## Decisions or Recommendations

1. Keep the 2025 World Context data read-only inside the composer.
2. Never auto-promote archival facts into current claim records.
3. Keep current observations, assumptions, and fictional translations in different arrays and visual regions.
4. Require complete claim-level source metadata before structural publication readiness.
5. Require uncertainty, rights, oversight, affected-community context, correction history, and a non-external perspective.
6. Preserve source disagreement rather than resolving it through hidden averaging.
7. Retain the eight imported code-collision groups and separate stable entity identities.
8. Keep West Bank and Gaza Strip as distinct archival components when their evidence differs.
9. Treat fairness findings as review prompts, never as country ratings.
10. Preserve unknown extensions and invalid originals without mutation.
11. Keep all processing browser-local and avoid identity, analytics, model-provider, or storage dependencies.
12. Before publishing a real current profile, run renewed web research against primary or authoritative sources and obtain local, legal, clinical, disability, affected-community, or subject-matter review where the claim domain warrants it.
13. Use the next research round to create a small, regionally balanced set of current **draft** proposals and conduct an independent second-pass fairness audit before public promotion.

## Risks and Limitations

- Deterministic validation checks structure and declared metadata, not factual truth.
- A source labeled local or official can still be incomplete, partisan, outdated, inaccessible, or unrepresentative.
- The adjective and threat lexicons are heuristic and can miss subtle bias or flag justified language.
- Equal source counts do not establish equal source quality.
- A proposal can pass the gate while still omitting minority languages, subnational variation, informal authority, or contested recognition.
- Translation quality and source-language interpretation require human review.
- Legal, institutional, sanctions, conflict, border, officeholder, membership, market, and technology claims can change after the research cutoff.
- Browser-local work can be lost unless the author exports a file.
- Unknown nested extensions are preserved only where the schema and import logic explicitly allow them; future migrations need their own compatibility review.
- The tool does not prove human comprehension, geopolitical accuracy, legal validity, scientific validity, native Firefox behavior, native assistive-technology speech output, production-host readiness, field performance, or live crawler outcomes.

## Validation Performed

The 2.0.20-wip validation plan covers:

- 195 country-roadmap options and archival context routes;
- all eight source-code collision groups;
- two State of Palestine archival components;
- configuration, proposal schema, and example validation;
- one page-level H1, canonical route, structured data, and local script loading;
- required section and claim metadata rendering;
- structural publication-gate failures and passes;
- comparative-fairness findings for unequal adjective, threat, uncertainty, rights, and perspective coverage;
- local import and export;
- unknown-extension preservation;
- invalid-input quarantine and unchanged download;
- 320-pixel containment, print behavior, accessible output, and the sole sticky `.menu-strip`;
- zero external runtime requests and zero persistent-storage writes;
- UAI backlinks, pointer-ledger checksum, durable-index entry, search, sitemap, answers, glossary, and machine discovery;
- static syntax, schemas, memory links and anchors, source integrity, accessibility structure, delivery budgets, finalizer idempotency, package integrity, and fresh-extraction equality.

Focused evidence is published in the Country Context Composer validation records for this release.

## Memory References

- [Country Context Composer hot memory](../../../.uai/country-context-composer.uai#current-publication-contract)
- [World Context data](../../../.uai/world-context-data.uai#country-context-composer-routing)
- [International coverage](../../../.uai/international-coverage.uai#country-context-composer)
- [International fairness](../../../.uai/international-fairness.uai#country-context-composer-fairness)
- [Regional intelligence atlas](../../../.uai/regional-intelligence-atlas.uai#country-context-composer)
- [Architecture](../../../.uai/architecture.uai#country-context-composer-architecture)
- [Decisions](../../../.uai/decisions.uai#country-context-composer-decisions)
- [Progress](../../../.uai/progress.uai#country-context-composer)
- [Test plan](../../../.uai/test-plan.uai#country-context-composer-validation)
- [Long-term memory pointer ledger](../../../.uai/long-term-memory.uai#pointer-records)

## Related Durable Documents

- [World Factbook 2025 Context Integration and Data Quality Report](world-factbook-2025-context-integration-and-data-quality-report.md#findings)
- [Equal Standards Across Unequal Records](equal-standards-across-unequal-records-international-institutional-fairness-rights-and-evidence-audit.md#evidence-asymmetry-analysis)
- [Global Alliance and Alignment Atlas](global-alliance-and-alignment-atlas.md#reviewed-synthesis)
- [How Alliances Actually Work](how-alliances-actually-work.md#reviewed-synthesis)
- [Informal Alignments, Patrons, Proxies, Intermediaries, and Issue-Specific Coalitions](informal-alignments-patrons-proxies-intermediaries-and-issue-specific-coalitions.md#reviewed-synthesis)
- [Alliance, Faction, and Network World-System Integration Report](alliance-faction-and-network-world-system-integration-report.md#findings)
- [UAI Memory Organization Report](uai-memory-organization-report.md#findings)

## Supersession Status

Current for IARPG-OPS-2 2.0.20-wip. It extends—but does not replace—the archival World Context integration report. A later implementation may supersede the composer contract after independent current-source profiles, human review, multilingual review, or a revised machine schema is published. The preserved 2025 CSV, archival profiles, proposal history, and source provenance must remain available after supersession.