{"schema_version":1,"research_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_external48_20260801","source_assessment_id":"eoa_inverse_innovation_exp03_opportunity320_20260801","cell_id":"computability_boundary_mapping__architecture_urban_planning","selection_stratum":"DEPLOYABLE_PRIORITY","search_queries":["automated building code compliance checking formal rules decidability parametric design research","site:gov.sg CORENET X automated regulatory compliance checking BIM official","building code compliance checking semantic web limitations research paper","Solibri rule-based checking building code official documentation ruleset classification","Amor Dimyadi 2021 systematic review automated building code compliance checking limitations open access","automated compliance checking BIM generality rules ambiguity human interpretation review paper open access","site:corenet.gov.sg automated model checker code checker scope manual review official","site:standards.buildingsmart.org IDS specification validation applicability requirements official","site:buildingsmart.org Information Delivery Specification IDS standard model checking official limitations","automated building code compliance checker official human review disclaimer","site:w3.org/TR/owl2-profiles computational properties polynomial time official W3C","site:w3.org/TR SHACL validation failure result conformance official","site:bls.gov OEWS 2025 software developers architects median wage official"],"sources":[{"source_id":"S1","title":"CORENET X Model Checker","publisher":"Singapore CORENET X, Building and Construction Authority and Urban Redevelopment Authority","url":"https://info.corenet.gov.sg/submission-portal-resource/more/model-checker","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"undated; current page accessed 2026-08-02","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["CORENET X operates a supplementary rules-based BIM checker rather than a universal compliance decider.","The checker covers basic IFC standards, modeling standards, and selected regulatory requirements.","Schema or model-quality issues can prevent further automated processing.","Qualified Persons review results, and agencies still conduct regulatory review.","The checker is being introduced progressively."]},{"source_id":"S2","title":"What is CORENET X and its current scope?","publisher":"Singapore CORENET X, Building and Construction Authority and Urban Redevelopment Authority","url":"https://support.corenet.gov.sg/hc/en-us/articles/14813381381007-What-is-CORENET-X-and-its-current-scope","source_class":"GOVERNMENT_OR_REGULATOR","publication_date":"2026-01-07","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["CORENET X is a government-industry initiative using BIM and collaborative regulatory workflows.","CORENET X is being rolled out in phases.","Submission through CORENET X became mandatory for specified large new projects from October 2025, demonstrating an identifiable public-authority adopter and material workflow commitment."]},{"source_id":"S3","title":"Information Delivery Specification (IDS)","publisher":"buildingSMART International","url":"https://www.buildingsmart.org/standards/bsi-standards/information-delivery-specification-ids/","source_class":"STANDARD","publication_date":"2024-06-04","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["IDS 1.0 is a final standard for computer-interpretable information requirements and automated IFC compliance checking.","IDS has a strict declared scope tied to IFC and alphanumeric information.","IDS does not cover geometrical aspects, illustrating an enforceable checking fragment rather than universal design compliance.","The standard includes documentation, implementer agreements, schemas, and test cases."]},{"source_id":"S4","title":"OWL 2 Web Ontology Language Profiles (Second Edition)","publisher":"World Wide Web Consortium","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/REC-owl2-profiles-20121211/","source_class":"STANDARD","publication_date":"2012-12-11","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["Formal rule and ontology languages can be restricted into syntactically enforceable profiles that trade expressiveness for predictable reasoning properties.","OWL 2 EL, QL, and RL impose structural restrictions and support decidable reasoning tasks with stated complexity properties.","The same recommendation reports undecidability for specified reasoning tasks under unrestricted OWL 2 RDF-based semantics, showing that computational guarantees are semantics- and task-dependent."]},{"source_id":"S5","title":"Shapes Constraint Language (SHACL)","publisher":"World Wide Web Consortium","url":"https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/REC-shacl-20170720/","source_class":"STANDARD","publication_date":"2017-07-20","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["SHACL distinguishes successful Boolean conformance results from processor failures.","Failures may arise from recursion or resource exhaustion and are not defined as false conformance outcomes.","Recursive shapes are not generally defined by the recommendation, supporting explicit unsupported-scope or failure handling.","Validation reports provide structured results and provenance-capable output."]},{"source_id":"S6","title":"Towards Automated Compliance Checking of Building Regulations: smartNorms4BIM","publisher":"IOS Press / SAGE Journals","url":"https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3233/FAIA220322","source_class":"PRIMARY_RESEARCH","publication_date":"2022-11-03","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["A research prototype translated controlled-natural-language regulations into an OWL 2 ontology, populated it with IFC-derived BIM data, and produced verification reports.","The prototype demonstrates technical feasibility for formally represented, bounded building-regulation examples.","The work characterizes itself as preliminary and demonstrates applicability through a concrete use case, not a universal checker."]},{"source_id":"S7","title":"Understanding Checking","publisher":"Solibri","url":"https://help.solibri.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500005009042-Understanding-Checking","source_class":"OFFICIAL_PRODUCT_DOCUMENTATION","publication_date":"2026-04-13","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["Commercial BIM checking uses configurable parameterized rules and predefined rule templates.","Checking produces structured passed, irrelevant, accepted, rejected, issue-severity, and blocked-error states rather than only a universal permit verdict.","A rule can be blocked when a precondition does not pass, providing actual prior art for non-Boolean operational status handling."]},{"source_id":"S8","title":"National employment and wage data by occupation, May 2025","publisher":"U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics","url":"https://www.bls.gov/news.release/ocwage.t01.htm","source_class":"OFFICIAL_ORGANIZATION_DATA","publication_date":"2026","accessed_at":"2026-08-02","claims_supported":["May 2025 mean annual wages were approximately $148,100 for software developers, $111,490 for software quality-assurance analysts and testers, $106,260 for architects other than landscape and naval, and $185,840 for lawyers.","Even a small multidisciplinary team therefore represents substantial direct labor before benefits, contracting overhead, software, security, data preparation, and evaluation.","These wage data support only broad resource-equivalent bands, not project price estimates."]}],"problem_evidence":{"support":"WEAK","rationale":"External evidence confirms that real regulatory and commercial BIM checkers restrict themselves to selected rules or templates, retain human review, and sometimes expose blocked or failure states rather than universal verdicts [S1,S3,S5,S7]. Formal standards also show that decidability depends on language, semantics, and reasoning task [S4]. However, this bounded search found no authority or product promising a total, exact, terminating Boolean decision for every extensible parametric plan-rule input, and no evidence measuring timeout-to-verdict conflation or resulting harm. The candidate's central prevalence claim therefore remains unverified.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S5","S7"]},"stakeholder_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"Singapore's phased but operationally consequential CORENET X program demonstrates public-authority and industry demand for BIM validation, selected automated regulatory checks, fewer iterations, and retained agency review [S1,S2]. Solibri and buildingSMART demonstrate mature practitioner infrastructure for configurable checking and bounded information validation [S3,S7]. None of these sources documents procurement demand specifically for computability proofs or an exact/bounded/UNKNOWN router.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S7"]},"prior_art":{"proximity":"ADJACENT_PRIOR_ART","closest_analogues":[{"name":"CORENET X Model Checker","similarity":"A government regulatory workflow automatically checks IFC schema, model quality, and selected regulatory requirements, stages checks, blocks some models from further processing, and leaves regulatory review to qualified people and agencies.","remaining_difference":"The published workflow does not state a formal accepted-language boundary, termination or total-correctness proof, undecidability analysis, or a contract separating exact, bounded, UNKNOWN, and resource-failure outcomes. The testable remaining difference is whether adding those controls prevents label leakage or unsound clearance while preserving useful coverage and review time.","source_ids":["S1","S2"]},{"name":"buildingSMART IDS 1.0","similarity":"IDS creates a strict, machine-enforceable IFC information-checking fragment, supports automatic conformance testing, and expressly excludes geometry from its scope.","remaining_difference":"IDS governs information delivery rather than substantive egress or permit compliance and does not provide a jurisdictional router, proof obligation, or official-review escalation policy. A test can determine whether an analogous formally enforced egress fragment can remain sound and useful.","source_ids":["S3"]},{"name":"OWL 2 profiles plus SHACL failure semantics","similarity":"OWL profiles restrict expressiveness to obtain stated computational properties, while SHACL distinguishes Boolean conformance from recursion or resource-exhaustion failure. Together they closely match the candidate's general computability-boundary and non-collapse principles.","remaining_difference":"These are general semantic-web standards, not a municipal plan-review implementation. The remaining domain-specific claim is that their boundary discipline can be mapped faithfully to actual building rules, parametric models, legal interpretations, and official escalation without producing unsafe clearances.","source_ids":["S4","S5"]},{"name":"Solibri parameterized rulesets and blocked-error states","similarity":"Solibri checks BIM with parameterized, configurable rule templates and exposes multiple result states, including blocked errors when preconditions fail.","remaining_difference":"Its documentation does not establish a decidability proof, a universal-versus-bounded guarantee classification, or legally governed UNKNOWN routing. The testable difference is whether formally certified scope and failure labels improve soundness or auditability over these existing operational states.","source_ids":["S7"]},{"name":"smartNorms4BIM prototype","similarity":"The prototype formalizes building regulations in OWL 2, combines them with IFC-derived BIM data, and generates verification reports for a concrete use case.","remaining_difference":"It is a preliminary example rather than an authority-operated boundary router and does not establish an unrestricted impossibility result or comprehensive egress coverage. A domain-faithful proof attempt and controlled comparison remain necessary.","source_ids":["S6"]}],"distinctive_claim_remaining":"For one legally specified plan-rule contract, enforce machine-checkable computational scope before execution, attach verified guarantee classes to results, and preserve INVALID, OUT_OF_SCOPE, UNKNOWN, and RESOURCE_FAILURE separately from exact compliant/noncompliant outcomes, with official review for every non-exact case. The incremental claim is that this package will reduce unsound or misleading Boolean outputs relative to the current script/timeout workflow without unacceptable loss of useful coverage or review throughput. The bounded search found adjacent components but no opened source documenting this complete authority-governed package.","confidence":"MODERATE"},"implementation_evidence":{"support":"MODERATE","rationale":"All major components have credible analogues: bounded IFC validation and selected regulatory checks [S1,S3], syntactically enforced reasoning fragments with known computational properties [S4], explicit failure separation [S5], formalized BIM-regulation prototypes [S6], and multi-state commercial checking [S7]. What remains unsupported is the hardest integration work: a legally faithful egress semantics, proof or counterexample for the actual accepted language, sound geometry abstraction, manageable UNKNOWN volume, and comparative performance in an authority's corpus.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S5","S6","S7"]},"scores":{"meaningful_impact":{"score":3,"rationale":"Permit and regulatory review is consequential, and CORENET X confirms that automated results feed real submission workflows while agencies retain review [S1,S2]. Preventing unsupported verdicts could matter materially, but no source establishes that universal-checker promises, timeout conflation, or associated injuries and delays occur at meaningful frequency.","source_ids":["S1","S2"]},"stakeholder_pull":{"score":3,"rationale":"Government and industry investment in CORENET X and mature standards and products show pull for bounded, auditable BIM checking [S1,S2,S3,S7]. Specific pull for computability analysis, proof artifacts, or UNKNOWN routing was not found.","source_ids":["S1","S2","S3","S7"]},"incremental_advantage":{"score":3,"rationale":"Explicit guarantee classes and non-collapse of failures go beyond the published CORENET and Solibri descriptions, while W3C standards show these controls are technically meaningful [S1,S4,S5,S7]. Comparative reductions in unsound clearance, delay, or reviewer work remain unmeasured.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S5","S7"]},"distinctiveness_plausibility":{"score":2,"rationale":"Restricted rule fragments, human fallback, structured result states, and failure separation all have close prior art [S1,S3,S4,S5,S7]. Only the planning-specific integration of formal computability evidence, guarantee-aware routing, and legal authority retention remains plausibly distinctive in this bounded search.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S5","S7"]},"technical_implementability":{"score":3,"rationale":"Standards, an authority workflow, a commercial checker, and a research prototype establish feasibility for the constituent mechanisms [S1,S3,S4,S5,S6,S7]. Legal-semantic fidelity, parametric geometry, proof construction, and useful-fragment coverage remain substantial uncertainties.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S5","S6","S7"]},"adoption_authority_feasibility":{"score":4,"rationale":"CORENET X supplies a credible example of building and planning agencies adopting phased BIM checking while preserving qualified-person and agency review [S1,S2]. A shadow-only study fits that authority structure, though procurement and local legal acceptance are not established.","source_ids":["S1","S2"]},"evidence_readiness":{"score":4,"rationale":"Existing standards provide concrete fragment, complexity, failure, and reporting concepts suitable for a preregistered test [S3,S4,S5], while real and prototype workflows provide baselines and implementation patterns [S1,S6,S7]. A fixed corpus and legal semantics must still be assembled.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S4","S5","S6","S7"]},"safety_net_benefit":{"score":5,"rationale":"Separating technical failure from false conformance is directly supported by SHACL semantics, and retaining qualified-person and agency review matches the CORENET workflow [S1,S5]. If enforced at the interface, these controls directly prevent UNKNOWN or resource exhaustion from silently becoming permit clearance or denial.","source_ids":["S1","S5"]},"scalability":{"score":2,"rationale":"IDS achieves interoperability through a narrow alphanumeric scope, while CORENET introduces selected regulatory checks progressively [S1,S3]. These examples suggest that jurisdiction-specific legal interpretation, geometry, rule maintenance, and exception review will constrain scaling.","source_ids":["S1","S3","S6"]}},"score_confidence":"MODERATE","costs":{"first_evidence":{"band_2026_usd":"50K_TO_250K","scope":"A 12- to 16-week shadow-only study of one jurisdiction's fixed egress subset and approximately 100 historical or synthetic plan models: legal and machine semantics, language-boundary checker, termination/correctness proof attempt, adversarial boundary cases, independent code-review adjudication, security and data handling, and comparison with the existing script/timeout and ordinary-review baselines.","confidence":"MODERATE","assumptions":["The authority supplies a usable encoded subset and de-identified or synthetic corpus.","Effort includes part-time formal-methods, software, architecture/code, official-review, legal/privacy, coordination, and evaluation labor.","BLS wage data are used only to establish that several professional person-months plausibly fit this broad band; benefits and contractor overhead increase resource-equivalent cost [S8].","No live permit decision, new hardware fleet, or full permitting-platform integration occurs."],"source_ids":["S1","S4","S5","S8"]},"initial_deployment_startup":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"One authority's controlled shadow-production capability for the validated fragment: integration adapters, scope enforcement, proof-artifact registry, labeled result API, audit records, access controls, test infrastructure, model-data preparation, staff training, legal and accessibility review, incident procedures, and acceptance evaluation.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["A validated fragment and router already exist from the first study.","Integration is limited to one authority and existing permit interfaces rather than platform replacement.","Several software, QA, architecture/code, legal, security, and coordination roles are required; current occupational wages make a multi-person-year effort consistent with this band [S8].","The system remains advisory and every consequential outcome receives official review, consistent with the CORENET analogue [S1]."],"source_ids":["S1","S5","S8"]},"operational_launch":{"band_2026_usd":"1M_TO_5M","scope":"Governed launch for a useful but bounded group of submissions at one authority, including production software and hosting, secure model storage, rule and proof maintenance, integration, monitoring, independent safety evaluation, procurement and compliance work, applicant disclosures, training, staffed UNKNOWN escalation, quality assurance, and incident response.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Launch covers multiple egress checks but not an unrestricted code corpus or automatic approval or denial.","The fragment achieves sufficient useful coverage and UNKNOWN volume fits reviewer capacity.","The breadth of CORENET's phased schema, quality, regulatory, and agency-review workflow illustrates the coordination and integration scope but does not provide a transferable price [S1,S2].","Resource-equivalent costs include loaded professional labor, software, cloud or on-premises equipment, security, evaluation, and contingency; BLS wages are only a lower-level labor anchor [S8]."],"source_ids":["S1","S2","S8"]},"annual_recurring":{"band_2026_usd":"250K_TO_1M","scope":"Annual operation for one authority: software and infrastructure, code and semantics updates, proof and regression renewal, data governance, cybersecurity, audit retention, reviewer and applicant support, incident handling, independent spot checks, accessibility review, and monitoring of UNKNOWN, coverage, soundness, and turnaround metrics.","confidence":"LOW","assumptions":["Operation remains limited to one authority and a bounded set of fragments.","Material rule or representation changes trigger revalidation rather than silent scope expansion.","A small continuing multidisciplinary team is required; official 2025 occupational wages support this broad recurring labor band before overhead and infrastructure [S8].","Major permit-platform replacement and multi-jurisdiction rollout are excluded."],"source_ids":["S1","S3","S8"]}},"verified_pipeline_gates":{"externally_supported_problem":{"status":"UNCERTAIN","reason":"Real systems demonstrably use selected checks, human review, and non-pass/fail technical states, and formal standards show why scope matters [S1,S4,S5,S7]. No opened source showed an actual universal total-checker promise, timeout-to-verdict conflation, or prevalence and harm data for the candidate's specific problem.","source_ids":["S1","S4","S5","S7"]},"externally_credible_adopter_or_authorizer":{"status":"YES","reason":"CORENET X identifies building and planning agencies as credible adopters of BIM validation and automated selected-rule checking while retaining qualified-person and agency review [S1,S2].","source_ids":["S1","S2"]},"distinct_testable_incremental_claim":{"status":"YES","reason":"The remaining claim is narrower than existing prior art: enforced computational scope plus verified guarantee labels and separate non-Boolean failure states should reduce unsound or misleading outputs relative to current script/timeout and ordinary-review baselines. OWL profiles and SHACL establish that the proposed distinction is technically coherent [S4,S5].","source_ids":["S1","S4","S5","S7"]},"bounded_next_evidence_step":{"status":"YES","reason":"A fixed egress fragment, fixed corpus, shadow-only execution, two named baselines, proof and counterexample attempts, and explicit falsifiers bound the study. Existing authority and research systems show that selected-rule BIM checking on concrete cases is feasible [S1,S6].","source_ids":["S1","S6"]},"no_unresolved_safety_or_authority_stop":{"status":"YES","reason":"The proposed study makes no live decisions, treats all failures and non-exact results as official-review cases, and stops on any unsound clearance or label leakage. This preserves the human-review authority pattern documented by CORENET X and the failure distinction required by SHACL [S1,S5].","source_ids":["S1","S5"]},"credible_cost_scope_and_range":{"status":"YES","reason":"Each band names jurisdiction count, deployment stage, labor, data, software, infrastructure, compliance, coordination, and evaluation scope. Current official occupational wages support the order of magnitude, although the absence of comparable project prices keeps post-study confidence low [S8].","source_ids":["S1","S8"]}},"next_evidence_step":"With one willing jurisdiction, preregister a 12- to 16-week, shadow-only study using one frozen, machine-readable egress-rule subset and approximately 100 de-identified historical or synthetic submissions. Before execution, publish the accepted grammar, semantics, bounds, proof obligations, and distinct EXACT_COMPLIANT, EXACT_NONCOMPLIANT, INVALID, OUT_OF_SCOPE, UNKNOWN, and RESOURCE_FAILURE states. Compare the router with both the current scripted/timeout workflow and ordinary official review on unsound-clearance rate, false alarms, label leakage, coverage, reviewer minutes, and turnaround. In parallel, attempt a uniform termination-and-correctness proof and a domain-faithful counterexample. Falsify advancement upon any unsound clearance, any conversion of failure or UNKNOWN into a Boolean verdict, unenforced scope, material formal-model-to-legal-model mismatch, or no improvement in safety at non-inferior reviewer workload. No live permit approval, denial, or enforcement action is included.","blocking_evidence":["No opened source established that a planning or building authority actually promises a total, exact, terminating checker over an extensible or computationally unbounded plan-rule language.","The legally accepted plan and rule grammar, semantics, numeric bounds, recursion facilities, scripting hooks, and external-call behavior for a willing jurisdiction are unknown.","No domain-faithful, answer-preserving undecidability construction or uniform decidability proof exists for the actual accepted contract.","Useful coverage, especially for atypical and accessibility-critical designs, has not been measured for a sound fragment.","The rates of unsound clearance, timeout or failure conflation, UNKNOWN outcomes, label leakage, false alarms, and reviewer workload are unmeasured.","No opened prior-art source documented the complete planning-specific package, but the constituent mechanisms have close prior art, so differentiation remains provisional.","Comparable implementation and operating prices were not found; cost bands remain resource-equivalent planning estimates anchored mainly to professional labor data."],"research_disposition":"PARTNERED_RESEARCH_PROGRAM","world_novelty_boundary":"No world-novelty conclusion is made or implied. This bounded search found adjacent prior art for restricted checking fragments, computational profiles, explicit processor-failure states, multi-state BIM checking, and official human review, but did not find an opened source documenting the complete authority-governed package. That search result cannot establish that the package is novel anywhere in the world, and broader literature, patent, procurement, standards, vendor, and jurisdictional searches could reveal closer matches."}