Validation Cross-Criterion Integration Module (VCCIM)
Architecture Ecosystem: Structured Reality Standards™
Architecture Family: VALIDOS™ — Validation Governance Architecture
Parent Standard: Validation Determination Standard (VDTS)
Operational Layer: Validation Determination Governance Layer
Category: AI & Interpretation
Subcategory: Validation Governance
Type: Parent Standard Module
Governed Space: Validation Cross-Criterion Integration
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Module
Effective Date: 11 August 2026
Compatibility: OOF® Methodology OS™ · GOA™ · OBIDENITY® · INTEGROS®
· ORA™ · AGA™ · AIG® · CLIA® · MGIA™ · ASGA™ · RIS™
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF®
Protection: MIP® — Methodological Intellectual Property
Canonical Language: English (UCL™)
Canonical Definition
Validation Cross-Criterion Integration Module (VCCIM) defines thegovernance framework for combining, relating, ordering,
constraining, and interpreting multiple criterion-level Validation
Determinations within a unified determination structure while
preserving mandatory criteria, critical criteria, dependencies,
exclusions, conditionality, hierarchical relationships, conflict
constraints, uncertainty, scope boundaries, and criterion-specific
methodological significance.
It establishes the conditions under which individual criterion
outcomes may legitimately contribute to an overall Validation
Determination without being flattened into an unjustified average,
score, vote, or simplified pass/fail result.
Operational Role
VCCIM serves as the fourth internal governance space of theValidation Determination Standard.
The preceding modules establish:
VDBRQM — Which results may legitimately participate
in determination?
VCDM — What does the qualified result set demonstrate about each
individual Validation Criterion?
VDCUGM — Which conflicts, uncertainties, and Determination
Constraints must remain visible?
VCCIM asks:
How should the resulting criterion determinations be structurally
combined so that their distinct governance significance is preserved
in the overall validation conclusion?
The governed progression is:
Criterion Determinations → Criterion Relationship Mapping →
Mandatory & Critical Logic → Dependency & Exclusion Logic →
Conditionality Propagation → Conflict Constraint Integration →
Hierarchical Integration → Cross-Criterion Determination Structure
VCCIM does not issue the final overall Validation Determination.
It establishes the governed integration structure from which that
final determination can be legitimately derived.
Module Operational Space
VCCIM governs:- cross-criterion integration,
- criterion relationship mapping,
- criterion hierarchy,
- criterion grouping,
- mandatory criteria,
- critical criteria,
- supporting criteria,
- dependent criteria,
- prerequisite criteria,
- exclusionary criteria,
- conditional criteria,
- independent criteria,
- criterion interaction,
- criterion weighting,
- weighting governance,
- non-compensatory criteria,
- compensatory criteria,
- criterion aggregation,
- integration logic,
- integration rules,
- cross-criterion conflict,
- Determination Constraint integration,
- uncertainty propagation,
- conditionality propagation,
- scope propagation,
- partial integration,
- hierarchical integration,
- integration consistency,
- integration completeness,
- integration change,
- and integration traceability.
Module Function
VCCIM applies after individual criteria have received governeddeterminations and material conflicts and uncertainties have
been classified.
Its function is to prevent:
- a large number of satisfied minor criteria masking failure of one critical criterion,
- mandatory criteria being diluted by favorable supporting criteria,
- criteria with different scopes being combined as though they applied universally,
- conditional satisfaction losing its conditions,
- Not Determinable criteria being silently treated as satisfied,
- criterion dependencies being ignored,
- prerequisite failure being overlooked,
- exclusion conditions being averaged away,
- post-hoc weighting being used to obtain a preferred result,
- incompatible criterion outcomes being combined without governance,
- and overall validation being reduced to an arbitrary percentage.
Criterion Integration Is Not Simple Aggregation
VALIDOS™ establishes:Criterion Integration ≠ Criterion Counting
and:
Criterion Integration ≠ Arithmetic Averaging
A validation containing:
9 Satisfied Criteria + 1 Critical Not Satisfied Criterion
does not necessarily equal:
90% Validated
Such a representation may destroy the actual governance meaning of
the validation.
VCCIM therefore integrates criteria according to their defined
relationships and significance.
Criterion Relationship Map
Before integration, VCCIM establishes how criteria relate toone another.
A Criterion Relationship Map may distinguish:
- independent criteria,
- dependent criteria,
- mandatory criteria,
- critical criteria,
- supporting criteria,
- prerequisite criteria,
- exclusionary criteria,
- conditional criteria,
- hierarchical criteria,
- and grouped criteria.
These relationships should derive from the governed Validation
Criteria Framework rather than being invented after results
are known.
Mandatory Criteria
Mandatory criteria establish non-optional validation conditions.Where a mandatory criterion is Not Satisfied, the permitted overall
determination may be constrained according to the approved
integration logic.
Where a mandatory criterion is Not Determinable, the architecture
may likewise prevent unrestricted positive determination where the
criteria framework requires positive establishment.
Critical Criteria
Critical criteria possess disproportionate consequence.Their outcomes may trigger:
- overall negative determination,
- conditional determination,
- additional validation,
- restricted scope,
- or overall indeterminacy
depending upon the governed criteria logic.
VCCIM preserves criticality rather than allowing it to disappear
within aggregation.
Exclusionary Criteria
An Exclusionary Criterion establishes a condition that prevents aspecified overall conclusion regardless of favorable
results elsewhere.
For example:
Presence of prohibited catastrophic behavior → Positive Overall
Determination Not Permitted
VCCIM preserves such exclusion logic.
Criterion Hierarchy
Complex validation structures may contain multiple levels.For example:
Metric → Criterion → Criterion Group → Validation Domain →
Overall Validation
VCCIM governs upward integration across these levels.
A higher-level determination should remain traceable to its
lower-level criterion basis.
Criterion Grouping
Criteria may be grouped according to:- capability,
- safety domain,
- system component,
- governance function,
- operational environment,
- population,
- lifecycle phase,
- or another governed structure.
Group-level determinations may support system-level interpretation
without collapsing individual criterion identities.
Cross-Criterion Dependency
Criterion outcomes may interact.Examples include:
- one criterion activates another,
- one criterion invalidates another's positive contribution,
- two criteria must both be satisfied,
- at least one of several alternative criteria must be satisfied,
- or one criterion changes the permitted interpretation of another.
VCCIM governs these relationships explicitly.
Non-Compensatory Criteria
A Non-Compensatory Criterion cannot have its failure offset byfavorable results from other criteria.
Critical safety requirements are common examples.
VCCIM establishes:
Strong Performance Elsewhere Cannot Compensate for a
Non-Compensatory Failure
where the criteria framework defines such logic.
Compensatory Criteria
Some criteria may legitimately permit trade-offs.For example, an overall performance domain may combine several
metrics where stronger performance in one dimension can offset
weaker performance in another within governed boundaries.
Where compensatory logic exists, it must be explicit and
methodologically justified.
Score-Based Integration
Some validation systems may use scores.VCCIM permits scoring where the score has a governed
methodological meaning.
It rejects score use where:
- criterion significance differs materially,
- mandatory conditions are hidden,
- uncertainty is omitted,
- failure thresholds are obscured,
- or scores create false precision.
Percent Validated
VALIDOS™ treats statements such as:“The system is 87% validated.”
with caution.
Such a statement is legitimate only where the percentage has a
formally defined and methodologically justified interpretation.
Simple division:
Satisfied Criteria / Total Criteria
does not automatically establish meaningful validation percentage.
Conditionality Propagation
A Conditionally Satisfied criterion must propagate its materialconditions upward where the overall conclusion depends upon it.
For example:
Criterion Satisfied only under Environment X
may mean:
Overall Determination positive only under Environment X
if that criterion is necessary for the positive determination.
Condition Conflict
Conditions themselves may conflict.For example:
Criterion A may be satisfied only under Configuration X.
Criterion B may be satisfied only under Configuration Y.
If X and Y cannot coexist, the object may not support a positive
integrated determination even though each criterion can
independently be satisfied.
VCCIM makes this visible.
Conflict Constraint Integration
VDCUGM may produce Determination Constraints.VCCIM integrates those constraints into criterion combination.
Examples include:
- Criterion A cannot be integrated with Criterion B,
- Criterion C remains Not Determinable,
- scope must be reduced,
- additional validation required,
- positive system-level conclusion prohibited,
- or only partial determination allowed.
Uncertainty Propagation
Criterion-level uncertainty may affect higher-level integration.VCCIM does not simply average uncertainty away.
It asks whether:
- uncertainty is independent,
- uncertainty is shared,
- uncertainty is cumulative,
- uncertainty is concentrated in critical criteria,
- or uncertainty prevents the higher-level conclusion.
Cross-Criterion Conflict
Criterion outcomes may be individually valid yet mutuallyincompatible at a higher governance level.
For example:
Performance Criterion: Satisfied
Safety Boundary Criterion: Not Satisfied
The conflict may not be a contradiction in facts.
It may reveal a legitimate system trade-off that must constrain
overall validation.
Scope Propagation
Each criterion may possess its own legitimate scope.VCCIM integrates only overlapping or explicitly compatible scopes.
An overall determination cannot claim a scope wider than that
supported by required criteria.
Conceptually:
Overall Determination Scope = Intersection of Required
Criterion Scopes
where appropriate.
Temporal Integration
Criterion outcomes may apply to different time periods.A higher-level determination must account for
temporal compatibility.
A criterion established six months earlier may not automatically
integrate with a newly validated criterion if material system
changes occurred between them.
Validation Depth Integration
Required criteria may have been validated at different depths.An overall determination should not claim a higher level of
assurance than the critical criterion basis supports.
The integration may therefore be bounded by the weakest required
Validation Depth where methodologically appropriate.
Integration Consistency
VCCIM assesses whether the integration structure itself remainsinternally coherent.
Potential inconsistencies include:
- mandatory criterion omitted,
- incompatible conditions combined,
- failed prerequisite ignored,
- wrong weighting applied,
- exclusion rule bypassed,
- criterion version mismatch,
- or Determination Constraint omitted.
Integration Conflict
An Integration Conflict exists where the governed criterionrelationship model cannot support one coherent integration outcome
without additional governance.
This may require:
- revised scope,
- partial integration,
- further validation,
- criterion reassessment,
- or overall indeterminacy.
Integration Logic Freeze
Before final Overall Validation Determination, the materialcross-criterion integration logic should be version-fixed.
This protects against changing:
- weights,
- mandatory status,
- exclusion rules,
- hierarchy,
- dependency logic,
- or integration rules
after seeing the combined outcome.
Integration Logic Change
A material change may be legitimate where:- criteria architecture error is identified,
- regulatory requirement changes,
- methodology is revised,
- or criterion relationship was incorrectly specified.
Such change should trigger reassessment rather than silently
rewriting the existing determination.
Cross-Criterion Integration Record
A formal record may preserve:- Criteria Set,
- Criterion Determinations,
- criterion roles,
- mandatory status,
- critical status,
- dependencies,
- prerequisites,
- exclusionary conditions,
- grouping,
- hierarchy,
- weights where used,
- conditions,
- Determination Constraints,
- uncertainty,
- scope,
- integration rules,
- integration completeness,
- integration consistency,
- and resulting Cross-Criterion Determination Structure.
Minimum Implementation Framework
1. Establish Criterion Relationship MapIdentify mandatory, critical, supporting, dependent, prerequisite,
exclusionary, conditional, hierarchical, and independent criteria.
2. Import Criterion Determinations
Preserve each criterion's:
- status,
- scope,
- depth,
- conditions,
- limitations,
- conflicts,
- and uncertainty.
3. Apply Mandatory & Critical Logic
Determine which criterion outcomes constrain
higher-level integration.
4. Apply Dependency & Exclusion Logic
Respect prerequisites, conditional activation, exclusion rules, and
cross-criterion relationships.
5. Apply Governed Weighting or Aggregation Where Permitted
Use only pre-established or methodologically justified
integration rules.
6. Propagate Conditions & Scope
Preserve the limitations necessary for the integrated conclusion.
7. Integrate Conflict & Uncertainty Constraints
Apply all relevant Determination Constraints from VDCUGM.
8. Build Hierarchical or Partial Integration
Where appropriate, create group, domain, subsystem, or partial
determination structures.
9. Assess Integration Completeness & Consistency
Identify omitted relationships, incompatible rules, or unresolved
integration conflicts.
10. Freeze Integration Logic
Preserve the exact logic entering Overall Validation Determination.
11. Preserve Lifecycle Traceability
Maintain:
- criterion relationships,
- criterion statuses,
- mandatory and critical designations,
- weights,
- dependencies,
- exclusions,
- conditions,
- scope,
- uncertainty,
- Determination Constraints,
- hierarchy,
- integration rules,
- integration status,
- versions,
- changes,
- and sufficient lifecycle continuity.
Governance Outputs
VCCIM may produce:- Criterion Relationship Map,
- Cross-Criterion Integration Record,
- Mandatory Criteria Integration Record,
- Critical Criteria Integration Record,
- Supporting Criteria Integration Record,
- Criterion Dependency Map,
- Criterion Prerequisite Map,
- Criterion Exclusion Map,
- Conditional Criterion Map,
- Criterion Hierarchy Map,
- Criterion Group Determination,
- Validation Domain Determination,
- Non-Compensatory Criterion Record,
- Compensatory Criterion Record,
- Criterion Weighting Record,
- Integration Rule Set,
- Conditionality Propagation Record,
- Scope Propagation Record,
- Uncertainty Propagation Record,
- Determination Constraint Integration Record,
- Cross-Criterion Conflict Record,
- Partial Integration Record,
- Hierarchical Integration Record,
- Integration Completeness Assessment,
- Integration Consistency Assessment,
- Integration Conflict Record,
- Integration Logic Freeze Record,
- Integration Logic Change Record,
- and Cross-Criterion Determination Structure.
Use Case 1 — Autonomous AI System
ScenarioAn autonomous AI system has ten validation criteria.
Eight are Satisfied.
One supporting criterion is Conditionally Satisfied.
One critical emergency-stop criterion is Not Satisfied.
Application
VCCIM does not calculate:
9/10 = 90% validated
Instead, it applies the critical criterion logic established in the
Validation Criteria Framework.
Result
The critical failure prevents the favorable criteria count from
producing an unrestricted positive integration outcome.
Use Case 2 — Healthcare AI
ScenarioA healthcare AI system satisfies accuracy, robustness, and
usability criteria.
The population-safety criterion is Satisfied only for adults, while
pediatric validation remains Not Determinable.
Application
VCCIM propagates the population boundary across the integrated
criterion structure.
Result
The system may support a positive integration for the adult
population while pediatric validation remains outside the positive
determination scope.
Use Case 3 — Industrial Autonomous System
ScenarioAn industrial autonomous system satisfies operational-performance
criteria in Configuration A and safety-recovery criteria only in
Configuration B.
The two configurations cannot operate simultaneously.
Application
VCCIM identifies a Condition Conflict.
Result
The criteria cannot be combined into one unconditional positive
system-level determination merely because each was individually
satisfied under different conditions.
The integration structure preserves the incompatibility for
final determination.
Architectural Position
Validation Cross-Criterion Integration is the fourth internalgovernance space of the Validation Determination Standard (VDTS).
The progression now becomes:
Determination Basis & Result Qualification → Criterion Determination
→ Conflict & Uncertainty Governance → Cross-Criterion Integration
VDBRQM establishes:
Which results may participate?
VCDM establishes:
What does each criterion demonstrate?
VDCUGM establishes:
Which conflicts, uncertainties, and constraints must remain visible?
VCCIM establishes:
How can the governed criterion outcomes be combined without
destroying their individual significance, conditions, dependencies,
scope, or uncertainty?
The fifth and final VDTS module can then determine:
What overall Validation Determination does the complete governed
validation record legitimately support?