Simulation Execution Documentation Module (SEDM)
OOF™ Origin Open Foundation™
Independent Methodological Authority
Architecture Ecosystem: Structured Reality Standards™
Architecture Family: SIMULOS® — Simulation Governance Architecture
Parent Standard: Simulation Execution Standard (SES)
Operational Layer: Simulation Execution Governance Layer
Category: Governance & Enforcement
Subcategory: Simulation Governance
Type: Parent Standard Module
Governed Space: Simulation Execution Documentation
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Module
Effective Date: 19 August 2026
Compatibility: OOF® Methodology OS™ · GOA™ · ORA™ · VALIDOS® · INTEGROS® · ADIT® · AGA™ ·
AIG® · ASGA™ · RIS™
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF®
Protection: MIP® — Methodological Intellectual Property
Canonical Language: English (UCL™)
Governed Space
Simulation Execution Documentation
Canonical Definition
Simulation Execution Documentation Module (SEDM) defines the governanceframework through which materially relevant information about Simulation
Execution is captured, structured, linked, preserved, version-bounded, and
made sufficiently reconstructable to establish what was actually executed,
under which configuration and conditions, what occurred during execution,
which interventions and deviations arose, how repetitions were related,
whether execution was completed, and which Simulation Outputs originated from
that execution.
SEDM converts distributed execution information into a governed:
Simulation Execution Record.
Its purpose is not to require documentation for documentation's sake.
Its purpose is to ensure that material Simulation Outputs and downstream
claims do not become detached from the execution history required to
understand how they were produced.
Operational Role
SEDM serves as the fifth and final internal governance space of the SimulationExecution Standard (SES).
The preceding modules establish:
SIM — What exact simulation instance was instantiated?
SECM — How was active execution controlled?
SOM — What materially relevant events and behaviors occurred during execution?
SRPM — How were executions repeated, related, varied, and compared?
SEDM asks:
Can the complete materially relevant execution history now be reconstructed
sufficiently to determine what actually ran, what occurred, how the execution
changed, and which outputs it produced?
The governed progression is:
Simulation Instantiation Record
↓Execution Control Record
↓Simulation Observation Record
↓Simulation Repetition Record
↓Execution Documentation Assembly
↓Execution Traceability
↓Execution Provenance
↓Execution Lineage
↓Execution Completeness Documentation
↓Execution-to-Output Linkage
↓Governed Simulation Execution Record
Module Function
SEDM exists to prevent: simulation outputs with no identifiable originatingexecution, intended configurations being substituted for actual executed
configurations, model versions becoming detached from execution records,
undocumented runtime interventions, execution deviations disappearing after
completion, failed and interrupted runs being removed from history,
observations losing their execution context, repetitions becoming
indistinguishable, seeds or stochastic conditions becoming untraceable,
simulation campaigns becoming collections of anonymous output files, later
reconstruction depending upon individual memory, partial documentation being
represented as complete documentation, and downstream validation or audit
being forced to infer what happened during execution.
Simulation Execution Record
A Simulation Execution Record is the governed documentation structurerepresenting a specific Simulation Execution and its materially relevant
execution history.
Conceptually:
Execution Identity Instantiated Configuration Execution Conditions Execution
Controls Observed Events Interventions Deviations Execution State History
Repetition Context Completion Status Output Linkage
=
Governed Simulation Execution Record
Execution Record Identity
Every materially relevant Execution Record should be bound to an identifiableSimulation Execution.
Conceptually:
Simulation Execution ID → Simulation
Execution Record
The record should not exist merely as an anonymous log file or outputdirectory.
Documentation Scope
Documentation requirements should correspond to the Simulation Purpose,consequence, complexity, execution environment, and downstream reliance.
SEDM does not require every technical event to be permanently recorded.
It requires:
materially relevant execution information to remain sufficiently available for
the intended governance purpose.
Documentation Granularity
Documentation may operate at different levels:Run Level
Episode Level
Batch LevelScenario Level
Campaign Level
or another defined execution unit.Large-scale simulation may combine these levels.
Run-Level Documentation
Run-level documentation may preserve: Execution ID, configuration, inputs,parameters, seed, execution state, interventions, deviations, observations,
completion status, and outputs.
Campaign-Level Documentation
Campaign-level documentation may preserve shared conditions across largepopulations of executions.
For example:
Campaign C-001
may define: model version, environment version, common scenario family,infrastructure, orchestration configuration, repetition rules, and shared
execution controls.
Individual runs then document material differences from that common basis.
No Duplicate Documentation Requirement
SEDM does not require identical information to be copied into every run recordwhere a governed shared Campaign Record already establishes that information.
The requirement is:
traceable inheritance.
Documentation Inheritance
A run may inherit documented conditions from a Campaign Record where: theinherited condition is explicitly linked, the relevant version is stable,
exceptions remain visible, and the run can be reconstructed without ambiguity.
No Assumed Inheritance Principle
SIMULOS® establishes:A run must not be assumed to inherit campaign conditions where material
evidence shows that its actual execution differed.
Actual execution takes precedence over intended campaign configuration.
Actual Configuration Documentation
SEDM should preserve the materially relevant configuration that actuallyentered execution.
This may include: Simulation Object version, model version, environment
version, scenario version, Input Set, parameter set, software build, hardware
configuration, dependencies, randomization basis, and initialization state.
Intended vs Executed Configuration
SEDM distinguishes:Intended Configuration
from:Executed Configuration.
Where these differ, the difference becomes part of the Execution Record.
Configuration Delta Record
A Configuration Delta Record may identify:Expected Configuration → Actual
Configuration → Material Difference
This supports later interpretation of unexpected behavior.Execution State History
SEDM may preserve state transitions such as:Prepared
↓
Initialized
↓
Running
↓
Paused
↓
Restarted
↓
Running
↓
Completed
This is materially different from a record that merely states:
Completed.
Execution Timeline
Where timing is material, SEDM may preserve an Execution Timeline connecting:Initialization
StartControl Events
Observations
Interventions
AnomaliesInterruptions
RestartsTermination
and:
Completion.
Event Ordering
The order of execution events may itself be material.SEDM should therefore preserve event ordering where causal interpretation
depends upon sequence.
Timestamp Governance
Where timestamps are used, the record should preserve sufficient context todetermine what they represent.
This may include: simulation time, wall-clock time, mission time, relative
execution time, or another defined temporal reference.
Simulation Time ≠ Wall-Clock Time
A simulation may represent:24 hours of operational behavior
while executing in:
12 minutes of wall-clock time.
SEDM preserves which temporal frame an event belongs to.
Execution Control Documentation
Material execution-control actions should remain linked to the execution.Examples include: pause, resume, termination, resource restriction,
synchronization, scenario progression, injected event, controlled failure,
recovery command, or another runtime control.
Intervention Documentation
A material intervention should document where applicable:Who or what intervened
WhenUnder which authority
What changed
Whyand:
Which part of execution may have been affected.
Human Intervention
Where humans intervene during execution, SEDM may preserve: role, interventiontype, decision point, timing, authority, and resulting execution effect.
AI or Autonomous Intervention
Where an AI or autonomous system modifies simulation execution, SEDM maypreserve: initiating system, decision basis where available, authorized
capability, action performed, affected parameters or scenario state, and
resulting execution path.
No Invisible Intervention Principle
A material intervention capable of changing Simulation Execution must notdisappear from the execution history.
Deviation Documentation
A material Execution Deviation should remain connected to: the expectedcondition, actual condition, time or execution stage, affected execution
component, response, and resulting execution status.
Deviation Resolution
A deviation may be:Resolved During Execution
AcceptedConditionally Accepted
UnresolvedExecution-Limiting
or:Execution-Terminating.
SEDM documents the status.
It does not independently determine downstream validity.
Observation Documentation
Material observations produced under SOM should remain linked to the executioncontext in which they occurred.
An observation should not become:
Behavior X occurred
without sufficient ability to determine:during which execution, scenario, state, configuration, and conditions
Behavior X occurred.
Observation Context Preservation
Where material:Observation → Execution ID → Execution State → Scenario → Configuration → Time
Context
should remain traceable.
Observation Limitation Documentation
If portions of execution were not observable, that limitation should remainpart of the Execution Record.
Examples include: telemetry loss, missing internal state, insufficient
sampling, sensor dropout, logging failure, or inaccessible agent state.
No Full-Observation Assumption
SIMULOS® establishes:Absence of a recorded event does not establish absence of the event where the
relevant execution region was not sufficiently observable.
Anomaly Documentation
Material anomalies should remain visible even where the execution ultimatelycompletes successfully.
Anomaly records may include: anomaly identity, observation time, affected
component, execution context, response, persistence, and relationship to
resulting outputs.
Failure Documentation
Failed Simulation Executions remain part of the governed execution historywhere material.
A failure record may preserve: failure state, failure point, observed cause
where known, affected scenario, affected configuration, recovery attempt, and
output status.
Failure Cause ≠ Failure Observation
SEDM distinguishes:Observed Failure
from:Determined Cause of Failure.
The execution record should not present an unverified causal explanation as
established fact.
Interrupted Execution
An interrupted execution should remain distinguishable from:Completed Execution
and:Failed Execution.
An interruption may later be restarted or abandoned.
Restart Documentation
Where execution restarts, SEDM should preserve whether the restart: resumedfrom prior state, restored from checkpoint, restarted from initialization,
changed configuration, changed input, changed seed, or created a new Execution
ID.
Execution Continuity
A restarted execution should not automatically be treated as continuous withthe original run.
The continuity relationship should be explicitly governed.
Termination Documentation
Termination may be:Normal
Rule-Based
Human-Initiated
AI-Initiated
Safety-Initiated
Failure-Induced
or another defined condition.Where material, the termination basis should remain visible.
Execution Completion Documentation
SEDM preserves the Execution Completeness status established under SES.Possible statuses may include:
Complete
Conditionally Complete
Partially Complete
IncompleteFailed
or:
Undetermined. Completion ≠ Success
SIMULOS® establishes:A Simulation Execution may be completely executed while the simulated system
fails catastrophically.
Execution completion describes execution status.
It does not describe desirability of the simulated outcome.
Repetition Documentation
SEDM preserves the repetition structure established by SRPM.This may include: Repetition Set ID, Reference Execution, controlled
constants, permitted variation, seed relationship, execution order, run
dependency, repetition drift, comparability status, and repetition
sufficiency.
Repetition Lineage
A repetition history may be represented:Run R001
↓
Unexpected Divergence
↓Focused Repeat R002
↓Focused Repeat R003
↓Rare Behavior Reproduced
↓New Scenario Requirement
SEDM preserves this lineage so that the discovery pathway remainsreconstructable.
Randomization Documentation
Where randomness materially affects execution, SEDM may preserve:randomization method, random seed, sampling configuration, stochastic
parameter state, and relationship between randomization and execution.
No Seed-Only Reconstruction Principle
A seed should not be treated as a complete execution record.Reconstruction may also depend upon: model version, environment version,
dependencies, initialization, inputs, hardware, software, timing, and
execution controls.
Execution Provenance
Execution Provenance establishes the origin of the Simulation Execution Recordand its material components.
It may connect:
Execution Record
to: simulation system, execution engine, orchestration platform,infrastructure, configuration source, input source, scenario source,
observation source, and responsible execution authority where applicable.
Provenance ≠ Integrity
SEDM governs execution-specific provenance relationships.General integrity properties remain governed under INTEGROS®.
Execution Lineage
Execution Lineage establishes relationships between Simulation Executions overtime.
Examples include:
Baseline → Repeat
Baseline → Modified Parameter Run
Failure → Recovery Run
Scenario → Stress Escalation
Model v1 Run → Model v2 Comparative Run
Initial Campaign → Follow-Up Campaign Why
Lineage Matters
Without lineage, a simulation repository may contain millions of outputs whilelosing the reasoning path that explains:
why later executions were performed.
SEDM preserves that relationship.
Execution Reconstruction
Execution Reconstruction is the ability to recover the materially relevantexecution basis after the original execution has ended.
A reconstruction should answer, where applicable:
What was executed?
Which versions were used?
Which scenario ran?
Which inputs entered?
Which parameters were active?
Which randomization conditions applied?
What occurred during execution?
Which interventions occurred?
Which deviations occurred?
Was the execution interrupted or restarted?
Was it part of a Repetition Set?
Was execution complete?
Which outputs came from it? Reconstruction
≠ Reproduction
A simulation may be sufficiently documented for reconstruction even whereexact technical reproduction is impossible.
For example, external dependencies may no longer exist.
SEDM distinguishes:
Can we determine what happened?
from:
Can we execute exactly the same run again?
Point-in-Time Reconstruction
SEDM should support reconstruction of the execution state at a materiallyrelevant point in time.
For example:
What was the active parameter configuration when the anomaly occurred?
or:
Had the human intervention already occurred when the autonomous recovery
behavior began?
Causal Sequence Preservation
SEDM does not determine causality.However, it should preserve sufficient temporal and execution relationships to
allow downstream analysis to investigate causality.
Documentation Completeness
Documentation Completeness asks:Does the Execution Record contain the materially required information
necessary for its intended governance and downstream use?
Possible statuses may include:
Complete
Conditionally Complete
Partially Complete
Incompleteor:
Completeness Undetermined. Documentation Completeness ≠ Execution Completeness
These are separate conditions.
A simulation may be:
Execution Complete + Documentation
Incomplete
or:Execution Failed + Documentation Complete.
This distinction is critical.
Documentation Gap
A Documentation Gap exists where materially relevant execution information ismissing, inaccessible, ambiguous, or insufficiently linked.
Examples include: unknown model version, missing seed, unknown intervention,
missing runtime log, unidentified scenario revision, missing input version,
unknown restart state, or orphan output.
Documentation Gap Classification
A gap may be:Minor
Material
Critical
or:
Undetermined
relative to the intended downstream use.No Documentation Inflation Principle
SIMULOS® establishes:A partially documented execution must not be represented as fully
reconstructable merely because large volumes of technical logs exist.
Volume of logging is not equivalent to documentation sufficiency. Machine Logs
≠ Governed Documentation
Raw logs may be important evidence.
But a collection of logs does not automatically establish: execution identity,
configuration binding, lineage, material event classification, completion
status, or output linkage.
SEDM provides the governance structure around technical records.
Documentation Uncertainty
Where documentation cannot establish a material fact with sufficientconfidence, the uncertainty should remain visible.
Possible representation:
Known
Conditionally Known
InferredUnknown
or another governed classification.
No Retrospective Certainty Principle
SIMULOS® establishes:Missing execution information must not later be converted into certainty
merely because a downstream conclusion requires it.
Execution-to-Output Traceability
Every material Simulation Output should remain traceable to the SimulationExecution or governed execution population that produced it.
Conceptually:
Simulation Execution ID
↓Output ID
or:
Simulation Campaign / Repetition Set
↓Aggregated Output ID Output Origin
SEDM establishes the execution-side provenance of an output.SOGS then governs:
what the output is, how it is classified, how it is bounded, and what may
legitimately be inferred from it.
No Orphan Output Principle
A material Simulation Output should not become detached from the executionbasis that produced it.
Aggregated Output Traceability
An aggregated result may represent: multiple runs, a Repetition Set, aScenario Set, or a complete Simulation Campaign.
SEDM should preserve the population of executions contributing to the
aggregate where material.
No Anonymous Aggregation Principle
SIMULOS® establishes:An aggregate Simulation Output should not conceal which materially relevant
executions were included, excluded, failed, or unavailable.
Excluded Execution Documentation
Where runs are excluded from aggregation or analysis, the exclusion may itselfrequire documentation.
This can prevent: cherry-picking, survivor bias, silent removal of failed
runs, and post hoc population manipulation.
Campaign Documentation
Large Simulation Campaigns may require hierarchical documentation:Campaign Record
↓Scenario Families
↓Repetition Sets
↓Individual Executions
↓Outputs
This structure allows governance at scale without losing material run-level
traceability.
Large-Scale Execution Documentation
A campaign containing millions or billions of runs cannot always preserveevery technical artifact indefinitely.
SEDM therefore supports risk- and purpose-appropriate documentation strategies
while protecting material reconstructability.
Possible approaches include: structured metadata, hierarchical records,
exception-focused retention, representative execution preservation, aggregate
lineage, checkpoint preservation, reproducibility packages, and selective
high-resolution logging.
Selective Retention
Selective retention may be legitimate where the selection logic itself isgoverned.
For example, an organization may preserve: all failed runs, all anomalous
runs, all rare-event runs, representative successful runs, complete metadata
for every run, and aggregated technical logs.
No Selective Success Preservation
Principle
Retention policy must not systematically preserve favorable executions whileeliminating materially relevant unfavorable executions.
Record Retention
Retention periods may depend upon: simulation purpose, consequence, regulatorycontext, contractual requirements, validation use, audit requirements,
operational reliance, incident exposure, and reproducibility needs.
SEDM does not prescribe one universal retention period.
Documentation Continuity
Documentation should remain sufficiently interpretable across: softwarechanges, model changes, environment changes, personnel changes, organizational
changes, storage migrations, and simulation-platform replacement.
Format Obsolescence
Long-lived simulation programs may lose access to historical records because:proprietary formats disappear, software versions become unavailable,
dependencies expire, or storage systems change.
SEDM treats continued interpretability as part of documentation continuity
where materially required.
Documentation Versioning
Execution documentation structures may evolve.Where schema changes affect interpretation, the applicable documentation
version should remain identifiable.
AI-Readable Execution Records
Where technically appropriate, SEDM supports machine-readable records capableof connecting:
Object → Model → Environment → Scenario → Input → Execution → Observation →
Repetition → Output
This can support automated: simulation governance, anomaly investigation,
validation, audit, comparison, and future simulation planning.
Automated Documentation
Simulation platforms may automatically generate substantial portions of theExecution Record.
Automation is encouraged where appropriate.
However:
Automated capture ≠ automatically sufficient governance.
The record still needs to capture the materially relevant relationships
required by SEDM.
AI-Generated Documentation
AI systems may summarize execution histories, classify anomalies, or constructdocumentation records.
Where AI-generated documentation introduces interpretation rather than direct
observation, that distinction should remain visible.
Observed Fact vs Generated Summary
SEDM should preserve the difference between:Machine-Captured Execution Event
and:AI-Generated Description of the Event.
This prevents generated summaries from silently replacing source execution
evidence.
Autonomous Simulation Campaigns
Future autonomous systems may: generate scenarios, launch simulations, analyzeobservations, select follow-up runs, terminate low-value branches, and
generate new campaigns
without continuous human direction.
SEDM becomes particularly important because the execution pathway itself may
be machine-generated.
Autonomous Execution Lineage
For autonomous campaigns, documentation should preserve where material:Trigger
↓
Simulation Selection
↓Execution
↓
Observation
↓
Machine Decision
↓Follow-Up Execution
↓Result
This allows later reconstruction of why the simulation system chose to execute
what it did.
No Hidden Autonomous Path Principle
When an autonomous system materially determines the simulation path, that pathshould remain reconstructable rather than appearing as an unexplained
collection of simulation outputs.
Space and Mission Simulation
Space agencies and aerospace organizations may run enormous simulationcampaigns before: launch, docking, landing, autonomous navigation, recovery,
fault response, or mission-critical maneuvers.
The challenge may not be generating simulation data.
The challenge may be answering months later:
Which exact spacecraft configuration produced this anomaly?
Which environmental assumptions applied?
Which run first revealed the failure mode?
Was the anomaly reproduced?
Which software version was running?
Was that run included in the final aggregate?
Which follow-up simulations were triggered by it?
SEDM provides the documentation structure required to preserve these
relationships.
Autonomous Vehicle Simulation
An autonomous-vehicle organization may execute hundreds of millions ofsimulated driving episodes.
A later incident may require comparison with historical simulation.
SEDM allows the organization to determine: whether the relevant condition had
been simulated, which execution population contained it, what system version
was tested, what behavior occurred, whether anomalous runs existed, and
whether those runs were included in downstream analysis.
Simulation Documentation Bottleneck
At simulation scale, the bottleneck may shift from:Can we run enough simulations?
to:
Can we reconstruct why the simulations produced what they produced?
Organizations may possess enormous computational capacity while lacking
governed relationships between: execution, configuration, observation,
repetition, anomaly, and output.
SEDM defines that relationship as a governable space.
Relationship to SIM
SIM — Simulation Instantiation Module establishes the exact executablesimulation instance.
SEDM preserves the resulting instantiation record as part of the permanent
Execution Record.
Relationship to SECM
SECM — Simulation Execution Control Module governs runtime execution control.SEDM preserves materially relevant control events, interventions, deviations,
and execution-state transitions.
Relationship to SOM
SOM — Simulation Observation Module governs observation of materially relevantexecution behavior.
SEDM preserves those observations with their execution context.
Relationship to SRPM
SRPM — Simulation Repetition Module governs repeated executions.SEDM preserves Repetition Sets, run relationships, variation, drift,
comparability, and repetition lineage.
Relationship to SOGS
SEDM provides the formal handoff from execution to output governance.The relationship is:
Governed Simulation Execution Record
↓Simulation Output
↓SOGS — Simulation Output Governance
Standard
SEDM establishes:Where did this output come from?
SOGS establishes:
What exactly does this output represent, and what may legitimately be inferred
from it?
Relationship to ADIT®
ADIT® may audit evidence derived from Simulation Execution.SEDM ensures that the execution-side record exists and remains sufficiently
structured for audit examination.
The boundary remains:
SIMULOS® governs Simulation Execution Documentation.
ADIT® governs audit activity over relevant evidence and records.
Relationship to INTEGROS®
INTEGROS® governs general integrity properties.SEDM does not duplicate general integrity governance.
It governs the simulation-specific structure, context, lineage, and
reconstructability of execution documentation.
Relationship to VALIDOS®
VALIDOS® may use Simulation Execution Records and Simulation Outputs as partof a validation basis.
SEDM does not determine whether those records are sufficient validation
evidence.
It ensures that the simulation execution from which such evidence originates
remains governable.
Relationship to ORA™
ORA™ governs Operational Reality.SEDM documents what occurred inside the Simulation Execution.
A complete Simulation Execution Record does not establish that simulated
behavior corresponds to Operational Reality.
Governance Boundary
SEDM begins when materially relevant records from Simulation Instantiation,Execution Control, Observation, and Repetition require consolidation into a
persistent and reconstructable execution history.
SEDM ends when the Simulation Execution has been sufficiently: identified,
configuration-bound, temporally documented, state-documented,
intervention-documented, deviation-documented, observation-linked,
repetition-linked, provenance-linked, lineage-linked, completeness-assessed,
and connected to its resulting Simulation Outputs
to form a Governed Simulation Execution Record.
SEDM does not determine: output meaning, output classification, legitimate
inference, simulation validity, correspondence with Operational Reality,
validation outcome, or operational reliance.
Minimum Implementation Framework
1. Establish Execution Record IdentityBind documentation to the relevant Simulation Execution ID or Campaign ID. 2.
Capture the Executed Configuration
Preserve the materially relevant actual: object version, model version,
environment version, scenario, inputs, parameters, dependencies,
initialization, and randomization basis.
3. Preserve Execution State History
Document material transitions from initialization through completion,
interruption, failure, or termination. 4. Document Material Controls and
Interventions
Preserve actions capable of materially affecting execution. 5. Document
Deviations and Anomalies
Keep materially relevant departures from intended execution visible. 6. Link
Observations to Execution Context
Preserve where and under which conditions material observations occurred. 7.
Preserve Repetition Relationships
Connect repeated runs to their Reference Execution and Repetition Set. 8.
Establish Execution Provenance and Lineage
Record where the execution originated and how it relates to prior and
subsequent executions. 9. Assess Documentation Completeness
Identify material Documentation Gaps and uncertainty. 10. Establish
Execution-to-Output Traceability
Bind material Simulation Outputs to their originating execution or execution
population. 11. Preserve Documentation Continuity
Ensure records remain interpretable for the required lifecycle period. 12.
Establish the Governed Simulation Execution Record
Consolidate the material execution history into the formal downstream handoff
to SOGS.
Governance Outputs
SEDM may produce: Simulation Execution Record, Simulation Campaign Record,Execution Documentation Requirement, Execution Metadata Record, Executed
Configuration Record, Configuration Delta Record, Model-Version Execution
Record, Environment-Version Execution Record, Scenario Execution Record, Input
Execution Record, Parameter Execution Record, Initialization Record, Execution
Authorization Record, Execution State History, Execution Timeline, Temporal
Reference Record, Execution Control Documentation, Intervention Record, Human
Intervention Record, Autonomous Intervention Record, Execution Deviation
Record, Deviation Resolution Record, Observation Context Record, Observation
Limitation Record, Anomaly Record, Failure Record, Interruption Record,
Restart Record, Termination Record, Execution Completion Record, Repetition
Documentation Record, Repetition Lineage Record, Randomization Record, Seed
Record, Execution Provenance Record, Execution Lineage Map, Execution
Reconstruction Record, Point-in-Time Reconstruction Record, Documentation
Completeness Assessment, Documentation Gap Record, Documentation Uncertainty
Record, Execution-to-Output Traceability Record, Aggregated Output Lineage
Record, Excluded Execution Record, Documentation Retention Record,
Documentation Continuity Record, and Governed Simulation Execution Record.
Use Case 1 — Autonomous Spacecraft Mission
Simulation
ScenarioA space organization runs a large pre-mission simulation campaign for
autonomous spacecraft recovery.
Several months later, engineers discover an unusual recovery behavior and need
to determine whether it had appeared during simulation. Application
SEDM connects the relevant historical execution to: spacecraft software
version, simulation model version, environment version, scenario, navigation
inputs, power state, random seed, execution observations, runtime
interventions, and follow-up repetitions.
The original anomaly can be reconstructed and its lineage traced into later
simulation runs. Result
Instead of searching through disconnected logs and output files, the
organization can establish:
which exact execution first produced the behavior, under which conditions,
whether it was repeated, and which downstream outputs incorporated it. Use
Case 2 — Autonomous Vehicle Simulation Campaign
Scenario
An autonomous-driving developer executes millions of simulated driving
episodes across changing software versions.
A rare operational incident later raises the question of whether a similar
condition had previously appeared in simulation. Application
SEDM allows historical Simulation Execution Records to be queried by: scenario
conditions, vehicle software version, environment version, observed behavior,
anomaly classification, execution completion, and output lineage.
The organization discovers that similar behavior occurred in several
historical runs, but some of those executions had been excluded from an
aggregate because they were classified as incomplete. Result
SEDM makes the exclusion and its execution context visible.
The organization can determine what actually occurred without retroactively
treating the aggregate output as a complete representation of all historical
executions.
Architectural Position
Simulation Execution Documentation Module (SEDM) is the fifth and finalinternal governance space of the Simulation Execution Standard (SES).
The complete SES progression is:
SIM — Simulation Instantiation
↓SECM — Simulation Execution Control
↓SOM — Simulation Observation
↓SRPM — Simulation Repetition
↓SEDM — Simulation Execution Documentation
↓Governed Simulation Execution Record
This closes the Simulation Execution governance space.The resulting record becomes the governed handoff into:
9. Simulation Output Governance Standard (SOGS).
Foundational Principle
Simulation Execution becomes governable beyond the moment of execution onlywhen the material configuration, conditions, events, interventions,
deviations, repetitions, provenance, lineage, and resulting outputs remain
connected through a reconstructable execution record.