For research & standards collaborators
Help us test the ideas.
Make the evidence stronger.
The Human Intelligence Layer raises questions worth examining together. What makes human context useful? What motivates people to contribute? And what must travel with a record for someone else to understand it?
A shared foundation. Your contribution.
We welcome researchers, standards contributors, learning institutions, evaluators, and ecosystem practitioners who can help turn those questions into focused investigations and practical tests.
Questions we would like to explore.
Human contribution & agency
What benefits encourage useful participation? How do people understand, correct, and control representations of their experience?
Organizational understanding
Does connecting workflow context, experience, and evidence help people identify gaps or coordinate decisions? Under what conditions?
Record meaning & portability
What context must accompany a learning or employment record so a receiving party can interpret it appropriately?
Responsible AI assistance
How should source evidence, uncertainty, interpretation, and human review remain visible when AI helps organize information?
Several ways to contribute.
Critique the model
Challenge definitions, assumptions, and causal claims. Help identify where the argument needs stronger evidence.
Design an evaluation
Define a research question, appropriate method, measures, and limitations around a bounded use case.
Test interoperability
Examine a specified record exchange, implementation behavior, or interpretation problem with participating systems.
Develop shared resources
Explore jointly authored guidance, mappings, examples, or findings with attribution and reuse agreed in advance.
An example: a credential that is technically readable but hard to use.
Imagine two systems successfully exchanging a learning record. The receiving organization can read it, but still cannot tell whether the evidence is relevant to its decision.
A joint investigation could examine what additional context is needed, how people interpret it, and whether a changed presentation helps. That separates transport and verification questions from the practical question of usefulness.
This is a proposed research direction, not a reported result. Success criteria, methods, and limits would be defined before testing.
Agree on the work and how findings can be used.
Research design
Specify the question, participants, methods, measures, access requirements, and any necessary ethics review.
Evidence & interpretation
Distinguish observations from inferences. Record limitations and findings that challenge the initial hypothesis.
Publication & reuse
Agree on authorship, attribution, confidentiality, review, funding, and rights to publish or reuse materials before work begins.
Connect research with implementation.
We want findings to improve the model, the product, and the way people work with it. Partners can help us identify which problems require better configuration, stronger evidence, or a change in the underlying design.
A collaboration does not imply standards-body endorsement, certification, or product compliance. Any compatibility claim must be tied to the specific implementation and test performed.
Questions about partnering
Must the work support Gobekli’s thesis?
No. Useful research can qualify, challenge, or reject an assumption. The research question and reporting arrangements should make that possible.
Can we access participant or customer data?
Access requires a defined purpose, appropriate authorization, and agreed protections. Participation in a collaboration grants no automatic access.
Can we co-author or contribute to standards work?
We can explore a defined contribution. Authorship, participation rules, publication, and any submission authority need to be agreed.
Is funding available?
Resourcing is considered for each project. We can discuss a bounded contribution or a funding proposal, but no standing grant program is promised.
Ideas and resources to explore
Start with these resources and bring the questions they raise to our conversation.
The Human Intelligence Layer
Review the definitions and design direction we want to examine.
Development status
Distinguish proposed architecture from available capabilities.
Building together, with a clear scope.
We’re building this with early collaborators. Available capabilities, configuration, integrations, and support are confirmed for each engagement. The configurations described here include development directions.
What question should we investigate together?
Bring a research question, interoperability challenge, or proposed contribution. Tell us the setting, evidence, and collaborators that could make it a useful investigation.