Structural Primitives

Executable semantic order is not implemented as a single system. It is examined through a small set of structural primitives that allow semantic commitments to participate in execution, coordination, and verification.

This section describes those primitives at the level of structure rather than implementation.

Each primitive addresses a distinct requirement of semantic executability. None is sufficient on its own.

Structural Perspective

The core premise is that semantics becomes executable only when situated within structures that:

admit precise operational interpretation,
define bounded responsibility and authority,
and remain stable under composition.

From this perspective, the question is not how to encode meaning, but how semantic constraints are positioned within computational structure.

Core Primitives

Semantic Instruction Architecture

Executable semantic order presupposes a stable intermediate representation at which semantic intent can be expressed and executed.

A semantic instruction architecture provides:

a minimal set of executable semantic units,
deterministic correspondence between semantic intent and operational effect,
and a verification basis independent of surface language.

→ See Semantic ISA

Interface and Composition Layer

Semantic constraints must be composed across agents, tools, and execution environments.

An explicit interface layer clarifies:

how semantic commitments are declared and invoked,
how execution boundaries are exposed across components,
and how orchestration occurs without collapsing semantic intent into procedural code.

→ See AgentIDL

Identity and Memory Structure

Executable semantics presupposes identifiable subjects of action.

An identity and memory structure supports:

persistent agent identity,
bounded responsibility and authority,
and continuity across execution contexts.

Without such structures, semantic commitments cannot be meaningfully attributed or enforced.

→ See Identity & Memory

Semantic Trace and Ledger

Execution under semantic constraint must remain externally inspectable.

A semantic ledger supports:

traceability of semantic commitments and actions,
replay and audit of execution histories,
and verification against declared constraints.

This structure distinguishes executable order from implicit convention.

→ See Semantic Ledger

Structural Minimality

These primitives are intentionally minimal.

They are not imposed as a framework, nor are they tied to a specific technology stack. Their purpose is to describe what must exist for executable semantic order to be possible, not how such systems should be constructed.

Additional structures may emerge over time, but none substitutes for these foundations.

Relation to Order and Systems

Conceptual foundation → see Executable Semantic Order
System-level projections → see System Projections

This section defines the structural boundary conditions of the research.

AgentIDL

AgentIDL: Semantic Interface Layer Agent Interface Definition Language (AgentIDL) is examined as a semantic interface layer through which agent capabilities and commitments can be expressed, discovered, and composed without reference to internal implementation details. Within the research, AgentIDL is treated as a structural mechanism for exploring how heterogeneous agents may participate in shared execution environments while remaining independently constructed and governed. Structural Role Rather than operating as a programming language in the conventional sense, AgentIDL functions as a declarative interface structure situated between semantic intent and executable coordination. ...

Identity and Memory Architecture

Identity and Memory Architecture: Subject Structures Executable semantic order presupposes the existence of identifiable subjects of action. Such subjects may be human, artificial agents, or organizational entities. Within the research, identity and memory are examined as structural prerequisites for attributing commitment, responsibility, and continuity across execution contexts. This page describes these structures at the level of role and constraint rather than concrete implementation. Structural Perspective Semantic commitments acquire operational meaning only when they can be attributed to a subject that persists across time and interaction. ...

Semantic ISA

This page provides a research-level elaboration of Semantic ISA as defined at the position level. It examines its structural implications and candidate primitives within executable semantic order, without redefining its role or scope. Semantic Instruction Architecture (Semantic ISA) is examined as an intermediate semantic execution layer that mediates between expressed semantic intent and concrete computational behavior. Within the research, Semantic ISA is not treated as a hardware instruction set or a finalized execution standard. It functions as a structural abstraction for exploring how semantic commitments may be rendered executable, inspectable, and composable across heterogeneous systems. ...

Semantic Ledger

Semantic Ledger: Trace Structures Executable semantic order presupposes that meaningful actions remain traceable beyond the moment of execution. Within the research, the Semantic Ledger is examined as a trace structure through which semantic commitments, interactions, and attribution events may be recorded in an externally inspectable manner. It is not treated as a financial ledger or consensus system, but as a structural mechanism for accountability. Structural Perspective When semantic commitments participate in execution, the question of recording becomes inseparable from the question of responsibility. ...

Structural Perspective#

Core Primitives#

Semantic Instruction Architecture#

Interface and Composition Layer#

Identity and Memory Structure#

Semantic Trace and Ledger#

Structural Minimality#

Relation to Order and Systems#