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.

From this perspective, identity and memory are not auxiliary features, but conditions that make:

  • responsibility assignable,
  • authorization enforceable,
  • and execution histories interpretable.

Core Structural Components

Identifiable Subject

Executable semantics presupposes subjects that can be consistently identified across interactions.

Decentralized identity mechanisms are examined here as one possible means of supporting:

  • persistent attribution of actions,
  • verifiable association between subjects and claims,
  • and independence from centralized identification authorities.

The emphasis lies on verifiability and continuity, not on any specific identity technology.

Memory as Commitment and Trace

Memory is examined not as general storage, but as a structured record attached to subject identity.

At the structural level, such memory supports:

  • the accumulation of semantic commitments over time,
  • the preservation of execution traces relevant to accountability,
  • and the retention of credentials or attestations issued by other parties.

Without these forms of memory, semantic commitments cannot be meaningfully enforced or audited.

Authorization and Delegation Boundaries

Executable semantic order requires that authority be both expressible and revocable.

Identity and memory structures are therefore examined in relation to:

  • how partial authority may be delegated,
  • how the scope of delegated action is bounded,
  • and how responsibility remains attributable despite delegation.

These questions arise independently of specific access-control mechanisms.

Scope Boundary

This architecture is not presented as a complete identity or memory system.

It functions as a structural lens for reasoning about subjecthood, accountability, and continuity within executable semantic order. Implementation choices are treated as downstream concerns.

Relation to Other Structures

This section delineates the structural conditions under which semantic commitments may be attributed to identifiable subjects.