Record Admission

Admission connects reviewed evidence to one declared use. It is not a global approval attached to a row. The same object can be admissible as spatial context, inadmissible for chronology-aware comparison, and outside the scope of a country product.

The domain language defines eligible population, admission, qualification, exclusion, outside scope, and publication member.

Admission Is Conjunctive

flowchart TB
    Candidate["governed candidate"] --> Identity{"identity resolved?"}
    Identity -->|no| Refuse["defer or refuse with reason"]
    Identity -->|yes| Origin{"source and locator recoverable?"}
    Origin -->|no| Refuse
    Origin -->|yes| Meaning{"role and observation unit declared?"}
    Meaning -->|no| Refuse
    Meaning -->|yes| Precision{"place and time fit this claim?"}
    Precision -->|no| Qualify["narrow role or retain context"]
    Precision -->|yes| Scope{"inside product scope and rules?"}
    Scope -->|no| Exclude["accounted non-member"]
    Scope -->|yes| Member["manifested product member"]

Confidence in one dimension cannot compensate for a missing relation in another. Exact coordinates do not repair unresolved sample identity; a final sample label does not supply chronology; project membership does not establish a sample-owned site.

Admission Packet

Every reusable decision needs enough information to be independently read:

Packet member	Required content
candidate identity	stable object, source-native identity, and observation unit
proposed use	product, geography, evidence role, and claim being evaluated
governing evidence	fact owners, captured locators, source versions, and typed relations
precision	locality resolution, coordinate basis, chronology class, uncertainty, and null semantics
rules	required fields, allowed roles, geographic selection, and comparison requirements
outcome	admitted, qualified, contextual, excluded, deferred, or refused
accountability	reason, warnings, failed rule, recovery condition, and affected descendants

A bare Boolean cannot distinguish an evidence failure from an out-of-scope record. That distinction determines whether recovery, a different product, or no further action is appropriate.

Separate Eligibility, Selection, And Materialization

Three gates sit between reviewed evidence and a visible feature:

Gate	Question	Non-member meaning
evidence eligibility	does this object support the proposed role and claim strength?	qualified, contextual, deferred, or refused under the evidence contract
product selection	does an eligible object belong to this geography, species, scenario, and product scope?	valid evidence outside this product population
publication materialization	does every selected member appear in the manifest and required formats?	integrity defect if selection has no accountable published result

flowchart LR
    Reviewed["reviewed evidence"] --> Eligible{"evidence eligible?"}
    Eligible -->|no| EvidenceOutcome["qualification, context, deferral, or refusal"]
    Eligible -->|yes| Selected{"selected for product scope?"}
    Selected -->|no| Outside["accounted outside-scope member"]
    Selected -->|yes| Materialized{"manifest and formats agree?"}
    Materialized -->|yes| Member["published member"]
    Materialized -->|no| Defect["publication integrity defect"]

This separation prevents an out-of-country sample from being described as weak evidence and prevents an eligible-but-missing feature from being hidden as a scientific refusal. Recovery belongs to the gate that actually failed.

Admission Is Not Monotonic

Newer or more detailed evidence can strengthen, preserve, narrow, or reverse an admission. A source refresh may expose that two labels identify one sample, that a coordinate was project-level rather than sample-owned, or that a date uses an incompatible basis. More data is not guaranteed to produce more members.

Evidence change	Possible admission effect
recovered sample-bearing supplement	context member may become sample-backed after independent dimension review
identity merge	two apparent candidates may become one governed object and one member
weaker coordinate provenance discovered	exact point may become approximate or be withheld
chronology basis corrected	spatial member may remain while temporal-comparison eligibility is removed
product boundary revision	evidence decision may remain valid while membership moves outside scope

Acceptance review therefore compares identities, roles, precision, and non-members as well as totals. A reduction can be the correct outcome of a stronger database.

Decision Identity

An admission decision is identified by the candidate, product, product version, proposed role, and evaluated evidence state. Change any one of those inputs and the decision must be evaluated again.

flowchart LR
    Candidate["candidate identity"] --> Decision["admission decision"]
    Product["product + version"] --> Decision
    Role["proposed evidence role"] --> Decision
    Evidence["governing evidence revision"] --> Decision
    Rules["named rule set"] --> Decision
    Decision --> Membership["member or accounted non-member"]

This identity prevents a decision made for a narrative report from being reused silently for a point map. It also prevents a previous admission from surviving a changed locality, chronology, boundary, or product rule merely because the candidate key stayed the same.

Admission Is A Query Result, Not A Record Flag

The database does not carry one universal publishable property. Admission is the result of evaluating a typed object against a versioned product question:

admission = evaluate(candidate, evidence revision, role, product, rule set)

For a Direkli Cave goat sample, the point-product query can pass because the sample identity, sample-to-site relation, supplied coordinates, chronology posture, and source locator are connected. The same object still requires a different decision for a numeric temporal comparison. For the Wadi Halfa dromedary context, the map query can return a qualified context member while a sample-backed query must refuse it because no final sample identity was recovered.

Query	Direkli sample	Wadi Halfa context
may appear on the animal point surface?	admitted as sample-backed evidence	qualified as project context
may count as a recovered sample?	yes, through the project sample master	no
may be treated as source-supplied exact geometry?	only at the coordinate record's declared basis	no; named-place resolution is approximate
may support numeric temporal comparison?	evaluate the sample chronology contract	unavailable without sample-owned chronology

This query model prevents a decision from leaking between roles. Visibility is not a reusable approval token.

Product-Specific Fitness

Evidence posture	Point map	Numeric temporal comparison	Narrative context
sample-owned site with source-backed coordinates and eligible chronology	admissible when scope rules pass	admissible at declared interval precision	admissible with provenance
sample-owned site with approximate named-place geocoding	qualified when the product allows approximate points	chronology evaluated independently	admissible with spatial caveat
region-only locality with project chronology	not a sample point	not sample-level time evidence	contextual use only
resolved identity with text-only chronology	spatial admission evaluated independently	unavailable, not non-overlapping	textual chronology may remain visible
contextual archaeology site without numeric time	context layer when geography passes	refused for same-period comparison	admissible as archaeology context
boundary polygon	framing only	no scientific temporal role	admissible as scope description

Admission therefore preserves evidence roles rather than forcing every family through one generic completeness definition.

Population Accounting

A product should expose the populations on both sides of its gate:

Population	Question answered
discovered	which potential sources or objects are known?
captured	which source material was acquired?
normalized	which objects have stable repository representations?
reviewed	which claims received a fitness decision?
eligible	which reviewed claims satisfy the scientific requirements?
admitted	which eligible members fall inside this product contract?
published	which admitted members appear in the manifested artifacts?

These counts need not be equal. The differences are informative only when each transition has explicit reasons and stable member identities. A published count without the reviewed and excluded populations cannot establish completeness.

Population accounting also requires stable identities on the non-member side. A total such as “234 published” is reproducible only when the 233 sample-backed members and one project-context member remain separately addressable. Otherwise the same total can survive a silent change in evidence class.

Admission Reconciliation

For one product and decision revision, every candidate in the declared population resolves to exactly one accountable outcome:

candidate population
= admitted
+ qualified
+ contextual
+ excluded
+ deferred
+ refused
+ outside scope

The categories are disjoint only within the same decision key. The same governed object may be admitted to one product, contextual in another, and outside the geography of a third.

Reconciliation check	Integrity condition
population closure	every expected candidate has one outcome and stable identity
manifest closure	every admitted, qualified, or contextual member required by the product appears in the manifest
non-member closure	exclusions, deferrals, refusals, and outside-scope objects remain addressable with reasons
role closure	direct evidence, context, framing, and decision-support members retain distinct roles
projection closure	JSON, CSV, GeoJSON, maps, tables, and narratives agree on member identity and qualification

An unaccounted candidate is not an implicit exclusion. It is a population or publication-integrity defect until the missing boundary is identified.

Admission Result Contract

Result	Required accounting	Permitted interpretation
admitted	passed rules, member identity, evidence role, and product membership	supports only the claim and strength declared by the product
qualified	passed rules plus visible qualification and bounded strength	usable only while the qualification travels with the member
contextual	context role, source scope, and separation from direct evidence	informs interpretation but does not support the target observation
excluded	candidate identity, evaluated rule, and exclusion reason	known non-member of this product, not globally invalid evidence
deferred	blocking evidence and explicit recovery condition	no admission until the condition is satisfied and reviewed
refused	proposed claim and evidence boundary that makes it unsupported	the stronger claim must not be inferred from another product

Admission is complete only when the result is represented on both sides of the gate: admitted members in the manifest and known non-members in accountable exclusion, deferral, or refusal surfaces.

Read An Admission Decision

For one visible member, confirm that its feature identity resolves to the product manifest, admission record, governing evidence, and source locator. For one expected non-member, inspect scope, eligibility, conflict, recovery, and exclusion surfaces before describing the absence.

When a rule changes, compare member identity before totals. One record can replace another without changing the count; a member can remain present while its coordinate or chronology becomes less precise. Both are substantive admission changes.

Continue with conflicts and recovery when a rule cannot be decided from current evidence, locality, chronology, and coordinate provenance for dimension-specific fitness, and publication types for the authority of the resulting surface.