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 Criterion Determination
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™)

Governed Space

Validation Criterion Determination

Canonical Definition

Validation Criterion Determination Module (VCDM) defines the
governance framework for evaluating qualified Validation Results
against individual applicable Validation Criteria and formally
determining whether each criterion is Satisfied, Conditionally
Satisfied, Not Satisfied, or Not Determinable within the validated
object, scope, depth, thresholds, evidence conditions, source
conditions, execution limitations, and methodological boundaries
established by VALIDOS™.

It establishes the first formal object-level conclusion layer within
Validation Determination.

Operational Role

VCDM serves as the second internal governance space of the
Validation Determination Standard.

The preceding module establishes:

VDBRQM — Which validation results may legitimately participate
in determination?

VCDM asks:

What do those qualified results demonstrate relative to each
individual Validation Criterion?

The governed progression is:

Qualified Determination Basis → Criterion Activation →
Result-to-Criterion Mapping → Threshold Assessment → Condition
Assessment → Uncertainty Assessment → Criterion Determination →
Criterion Determination Record

VCDM does not yet integrate all criteria into an overall
Validation Determination.

It determines each criterion independently before cross-criterion
interpretation begins.

Module Operational Space

VCDM governs:

• criterion activation,
• criterion applicability,
• criterion-level determination,
• result-to-criterion mapping,
• criterion evidence basis,
• criterion threshold assessment,
• criterion acceptance conditions,
• criterion rejection conditions,
• criterion satisfaction,
• conditional criterion satisfaction,
• criterion non-satisfaction,
• criterion non-determinability,
• mandatory criterion status,
• critical criterion status,
• criterion dependencies,
• criterion prerequisites,
• criterion exclusions,
• criterion uncertainty,
• criterion limitations,
• criterion scope,
• criterion depth,
• criterion determination confidence,
• criterion determination conflict signals,
• criterion determination versioning,
• criterion reassessment,
• and criterion-determination traceability.

Module Function

VCDM applies after the Validation Determination Basis has been
established and material results have been qualified.

Its function is to prevent:

• raw results being interpreted without explicit criterion linkage,
• criterion satisfaction being assumed from general system performance,
• missing evidence being converted into criterion failure,
• missing evidence being converted into criterion success,
• thresholds being changed after results are known,
• conditional findings being represented as unconditional,
• one strong result overriding multiple contradictory results without governance,
• mandatory and critical criteria losing their significance,
• criterion scope expanding beyond validated scope,
• criterion outcomes being detached from Validation Depth,
• and overall determination being constructed before individual criterion outcomes are explicitly established.

Criterion Activation

Not every Validation Criterion is necessarily applicable to every
Validation Object or Validation Execution.

VCDM therefore begins by establishing which criteria are active for
the determination.

A criterion may be:

Applicable

Conditionally Applicable

Not Applicable

or:

Applicability Undetermined

Criterion applicability should derive from the governed Validation
Criteria Framework rather than being improvised
during determination.

Criterion Identity

Every active criterion should be sufficiently identifiable.

A Criterion Determination Record may include:

• Criterion Identifier,
• criterion version,
• criterion definition,
• criterion type,
• mandatory status,
• critical status,
• threshold,
• acceptance conditions,
• rejection conditions,
• scope,
• dependencies,
• prerequisites,
• and applicable Validation Depth.

Criterion-to-Result Mapping

VCDM maps qualified Validation Results to the criterion they are
expected to inform.

The basic relationship is:

Validation Criterion → Qualified Results → Criterion Determination

Where multiple results contribute, their distinct roles should
remain visible.

A result may function as:

• primary support,
• corroborating support,
• contrary support,
• contextual support,
• threshold evidence,
• or another defined contribution.

Result Relevance to Criterion

A result may be valid for determination generally while still not
materially inform a specific criterion.

VCDM therefore preserves criterion-specific result relevance.

Determination Eligible Result ≠ Relevant to Every Criterion

Criterion Evidence Basis

Each criterion should have an identifiable evidence basis assembled
from qualified results and their associated evidence and
source conditions.

This basis should allow a reviewer to understand:

• what information supports satisfaction,
• what information supports non-satisfaction,
• what uncertainty remains,
• and what limitations apply.

Threshold-Based Criterion Determination

Some criteria depend upon explicit thresholds.

Examples may include:

• maximum error rate,
• minimum reliability level,
• response-time boundary,
• safety limit,
• confidence threshold,
• tolerance range,
• or another measurable condition.

VCDM governs whether the qualified results demonstrate performance
relative to the approved threshold.

Threshold Integrity

Thresholds must remain those established through prior governance.

VALIDOS™ establishes:

Thresholds must not be moved after results are known merely to
produce a preferred validation outcome.

Where a threshold legitimately changes, the change should trigger
criterion reassessment rather than silent reinterpretation.

Non-Threshold Criteria

Not every criterion can be reduced to a numerical threshold.

Some criteria may depend upon:

• documented existence,
• qualitative conditions,
• structural requirements,
• prohibited behaviors,
• procedural requirements,
• contextual acceptability,
• or expert interpretation.

VCDM supports criterion determination through appropriate governed
logic rather than forcing all validation into numeric scoring.

Acceptance Conditions

A criterion may define conditions under which satisfaction can
be established.

These may include:

• threshold achievement,
• required evidence combination,
• independent corroboration,
• absence of exclusion conditions,
• required operational behavior,
• required documentation,
• or another criterion-specific condition.

Acceptance conditions should be explicit.

Rejection Conditions

Some criteria may establish explicit rejection or
non-satisfaction conditions.

For example:

Any critical safety override failure → Criterion Not Satisfied

Rejection conditions may be binary even where other parts of the
criterion perform strongly.

Criterion Satisfied

A criterion receives Criterion Satisfied where the qualified
Determination Basis sufficiently demonstrates that the criterion's
required conditions have been met within the applicable
validation boundaries.

A satisfied determination should remain bounded to:

• object version,
• scope,
• population,
• environment,
• operational state,
• time,
• Validation Depth,
• and applicable conditions.

Criterion Conditionally Satisfied

A criterion receives Criterion Conditionally Satisfied where the
required condition is demonstrated only subject to explicit
limitations or restrictions.

Examples include:

• satisfied only within a defined operating range,
• satisfied only for a specified population,
• satisfied only while a control remains active,
• satisfied only under a specific configuration,
• satisfied only with continuing monitoring,
• or satisfied only for a defined period.

Conditionality is part of the criterion outcome.

Criterion Not Satisfied

A criterion receives Criterion Not Satisfied where the qualified
Determination Basis sufficiently demonstrates that one or more
required criterion conditions have not been met.

This requires affirmative governed basis for non-satisfaction.

VALIDOS™ establishes:

Criterion Not Satisfied must not be inferred merely from
insufficient evidence.

Criterion Not Determinable

A criterion receives Criterion Not Determinable where the available
governed validation record cannot legitimately establish either
satisfaction or non-satisfaction.

Possible causes include:

• insufficient results,
• conflicting results,
• excessive uncertainty,
• invalid execution portion,
• unresolved evidence limitation,
• unresolved source limitation,
• insufficient Validation Depth,
• missing required scenario,
• or another methodological gap.

Not Determinable Is Methodologically Valid

VALIDOS™ recognizes:

Not Determinable is a valid conclusion where certainty is
not supported.

This protects the architecture from forcing every criterion into
Pass or Fail.

Criterion Failure and Validation Failure Are Different

A criterion may be Not Satisfied.

That does not automatically determine the overall Validation
Determination unless the criterion's governance significance
requires it.

For example:

a supporting criterion may fail while mandatory criteria
remain satisfied.

The overall effect belongs to later cross-criterion integration.

Mandatory Criterion

A Mandatory Criterion is a criterion whose satisfaction is required
for a defined positive overall Validation Determination.

Where a mandatory criterion is Not Satisfied, the later overall
determination may be constrained according to the approved
criteria framework.

VCDM records mandatory status.

It does not invent its consequence after observing results.

Critical Criterion

A Critical Criterion represents a criterion whose failure or
uncertainty may carry disproportionate methodological or
operational significance.

Critical status may require stronger:

• evidence,
• Validation Depth,
• source reliability,
• execution confidence,
• or determination treatment.

Critical status should be established prior to final result
interpretation where possible.

Mandatory and Critical Are Different

A criterion can be:

• Mandatory but not Critical,
• Critical but not Mandatory,
• both,
• or neither.

For example:

A critical criterion may trigger additional validation if Not
Determinable, while a mandatory criterion may simply be required for
positive determination.

VCDM preserves this distinction.

Criterion Dependencies

One criterion may depend upon another.

For example:

Criterion B can only be meaningfully determined if Criterion A
is Satisfied.

VCDM governs such dependency where established by the Validation
Criteria Framework.

Criterion Prerequisite Failure

Where a prerequisite criterion is not satisfied or not determinable,
dependent criterion determination may require:

• suspension,
• conditional determination,
• non-determinability,
• or another governed response.

The dependent criterion should not be interpreted as though the
prerequisite existed.

Criterion Exclusion Condition

Some criteria may include exclusion conditions that automatically
prevent satisfaction.

For example:

If prohibited behavior X occurs under defined conditions, criterion
cannot be classified as Satisfied.

VCDM preserves such logic.

Criterion Scope

Each criterion outcome applies only to the scope supported by its
Determination Basis.

Criterion Scope may be narrower than the overall Validation Scope.

For example:

A criterion may be determined only for:

• one population,
• one subsystem,
• one operating state,
• one region,
• one time period,
• or one configuration.

Criterion Depth

A criterion outcome should preserve the Validation Depth
actually achieved.

A criterion may be:

Satisfied at Preliminary Depth

but not yet support:

High-Assurance Satisfaction

if the deeper methodological requirement was not met.

Criterion Determination Strength

Where useful, VCDM may distinguish the methodological strength
supporting a criterion outcome.

This may consider:

• result quality,
• evidence fitness,
• source reliability,
• execution conformity,
• corroboration,
• uncertainty,
• and Validation Depth.

Determination strength should not replace the criterion
outcome itself.

Criterion Confidence

Some implementations may use a confidence representation.

Where used, confidence must remain distinct from criterion status.

For example:

Criterion Satisfied with moderate confidence

is different from:

Criterion Conditionally Satisfied

Confidence concerns epistemic strength.

Conditionality concerns applicability boundaries.

Criterion Uncertainty

Uncertainty may arise from:

• measurement,
• sampling,
• methodology,
• evidence,
• sources,
• execution,
• object variability,
• or conflicting results.

VCDM asks whether uncertainty is:

• immaterial,
• tolerable,
• material,
• or determination-blocking for the criterion.

Uncertainty-Compatible Satisfaction

A criterion may still be Satisfied where uncertainty remains but
does not materially threaten the conclusion under the governed
Validation Depth and threshold logic.

Perfect certainty is not required.

Uncertainty-Driven Conditionality

Where uncertainty restricts the conditions under which satisfaction
can be defended, the outcome may become:

Criterion Conditionally Satisfied

Uncertainty-Driven Non-Determinability

Where uncertainty is large enough that satisfaction and
non-satisfaction cannot be distinguished, the correct
outcome becomes:

Criterion Not Determinable

Criterion Conflict Signal

VCDM may identify that qualified results support materially
different criterion interpretations.

At this stage, the conflict is preserved as a Criterion
Conflict Signal.

Detailed conflict integration belongs to the next VDTS module.

Criterion Determination Logic

For each criterion, VCDM should establish sufficient
logic connecting:

Criterion Requirement → Qualified Results → Threshold / Condition
Assessment → Uncertainty → Criterion Outcome

This prevents criterion determinations from becoming unexplained
judgment labels.

Human Criterion Determination

Where human judgment is required, the determination should remain
connected to:

• criterion logic,
• qualified results,
• applicable evidence,
• source conditions,
• limitations,
• and uncertainty.

The human evaluator should not be able to substitute personal
preference for the governed criterion.

Automated Criterion Determination

Where criterion logic is sufficiently explicit, determination may
be automated.

Automation may evaluate:

• thresholds,
• binary conditions,
• logical combinations,
• exclusions,
• mandatory dependencies,
• or structured decision rules.

The automated rule set should remain versioned and traceable.

AI-Assisted Criterion Determination

AI may assist with:

• mapping results to criteria,
• identifying contradictions,
• summarizing evidence,
• detecting missing information,
• or preparing determination rationale.

AI assistance must remain subordinate to the governed
criterion logic.

Criterion Determination Record

A formal record should preserve, where applicable:

• Criterion Identifier,
• Validation Object,
• criterion version,
• criterion requirement,
• scope,
• Validation Depth,
• threshold,
• acceptance conditions,
• rejection conditions,
• mandatory status,
• critical status,
• qualified result set,
• relevant evidence,
• source conditions,
• execution conditions,
• uncertainty,
• limitations,
• conflicts,
• determination logic,
• Criterion Determination,
• determination authority where applicable,
• date,
• and sufficient traceability.

Criterion Determination Versioning

If a criterion determination changes, the previous determination
should remain historically visible.

Possible transitions include:

Satisfied → Conditionally Satisfied Satisfied → Not Determinable

Conditionally Satisfied → Satisfied

Not Determinable → Not Satisfied

or other governed changes.

Criterion Reassessment

Reassessment may be triggered by:

• new qualified results,
• corrected execution records,
• evidence reassessment,
• Source Reliability change,
• changed threshold,
• changed criterion interpretation,
• new uncertainty,
• newly discovered deviation,
• or object change.

Criterion Determination Suspension

A criterion determination may require temporary suspension where new
information materially undermines confidence but reassessment
is incomplete.

Suspension preserves methodological caution without prematurely
creating a new final outcome.

Criterion Determination Withdrawal

A criterion determination may be withdrawn where the basis
supporting it is materially destroyed.

This may occur because of:

• invalid result set,
• wrong object version,
• compromised critical evidence,
• source failure,
• invalid execution,
• or fundamental criterion error.

Minimum Implementation Framework

1. Activate Applicable Criteria

Identify the criteria eligible for determination.

2. Establish Criterion Requirements

Preserve:

• definition,
• threshold,
• acceptance conditions,
• rejection conditions,
• mandatory status,
• critical status,
• dependencies,
• and Validation Depth.

3. Map Qualified Results

Associate legitimate Validation Results with each criterion.

4. Establish Criterion Evidence Basis

Identify the evidentiary and source conditions supporting the
result set.

5. Evaluate Thresholds and Conditions

Determine whether acceptance, rejection, exclusion, or prerequisite
conditions are satisfied.

6. Integrate Criterion-Level Uncertainty

Assess whether uncertainty affects the outcome.

7. Establish Criterion Determination

Classify each criterion as:

• Criterion Satisfied,
• Criterion Conditionally Satisfied,
• Criterion Not Satisfied,
• or Criterion Not Determinable.

8. Preserve Conflict Signals

Record material result disagreement requiring later
conflict governance.

9. Establish Scope and Limitations

Bound the criterion determination to the conditions
actually demonstrated.

10. Preserve Lifecycle Traceability

Maintain:

• Criterion Identifier,
• criterion version,
• Validation Object reference,
• qualified results,
• evidence,
• sources,
• execution references,
• threshold assessment,
• acceptance conditions,
• rejection conditions,
• uncertainty,
• limitations,
• scope,
• depth,
• status,
• determination rationale,
• versions,
• reassessment triggers,
• and sufficient lifecycle continuity.

Governance Outputs

VCDM may produce:

• Active Validation Criteria Register,
• Criterion Applicability Record,
• Criterion Determination Basis,
• Result-to-Criterion Map,
• Criterion Evidence Basis,
• Criterion Threshold Assessment,
• Criterion Acceptance Assessment,
• Criterion Rejection Assessment,
• Criterion Satisfaction Record,
• Conditional Criterion Satisfaction Record,
• Criterion Non-Satisfaction Record,
• Criterion Not Determinable Record,
• Mandatory Criterion Record,
• Critical Criterion Record,
• Criterion Dependency Map,
• Criterion Prerequisite Record,
• Criterion Exclusion Record,
• Criterion Uncertainty Record,
• Criterion Scope Record,
• Criterion Depth Record,
• Criterion Conflict Signal,
• Criterion Determination,
• Criterion Determination Record,
• Criterion Determination Reassessment Trigger,
• Criterion Determination Change Record,
• Criterion Determination Suspension Record,
• and Criterion Determination Withdrawal Record.

Use Case 1 — Autonomous AI Safety

Scenario

An autonomous AI system has a criterion requiring successful human
override within a defined maximum response time.

Application

Qualified execution results show:

• all normal-state override tests satisfy the threshold,
• one degraded-network test exceeds the threshold,
• and one critical emergency-state result is missing because execution failed.

Result

VCDM does not average the successful tests.

The criterion may become:

Criterion Not Determinable

or:

Criterion Not Satisfied

depending upon the exact approved criterion logic governing the
degraded failure and missing critical condition.

Use Case 2 — Healthcare AI

Scenario

A diagnostic model meets required accuracy thresholds for the
overall validated population but evidence for one subgroup supports
only a narrower operating condition.

Application

VCDM keeps the subgroup limitation attached to the criterion.

Result

The criterion may be:

Criterion Conditionally Satisfied

rather than universally Satisfied.

Use Case 3 — Industrial System

Scenario

A safety criterion requires that system temperature never exceed an
approved limit during a defined stress test.

All average measurements are well below the limit, but one
legitimate qualified result exceeds it.

Application

VCDM applies the approved rejection condition rather than averaging
all measurements.

Result

If the criterion defines any threshold exceedance as disqualifying,
the criterion becomes:

Criterion Not Satisfied

despite favorable average performance.

Architectural Position

Validation Criterion Determination is the second internal governance
space of the Validation Determination Standard (VDTS).

The progression now becomes:

Determination Basis & Result Qualification → Validation
Criterion Determination

VDBRQM establishes:

Which results may legitimately participate?

VCDM establishes:

What does that qualified result set demonstrate about each
individual Validation Criterion?

The next VDTS governance stage can then ask: How should
contradictions, uncertainty, conflicting criterion evidence, and
unresolved interpretive conditions be governed before multiple
criterion outcomes are integrated?

The VDTS internal progression therefore continues:

Determination Basis & Result Qualification → Criterion Determination
→ Conflict & Uncertainty Governance → Cross-Criterion Integration →
Overall Validation Determination

Foundational Principle

A criterion should be declared satisfied only when the governed
validation record demonstrates satisfaction of that criterion—not
merely because the overall system performed well.

Canonical Closing Statement

Validation Criterion Determination Module establishes the
criterion-level conclusion layer of VALIDOS™ by governing how
qualified Validation Results are interpreted against individual
Validation Criteria, thresholds, acceptance and rejection
conditions, mandatory and critical status, dependencies, scope,
depth, evidence, sources, execution conditions, uncertainty, and
limitations. VCDM ensures that every criterion receives the outcome
the governed validation record can actually support—Satisfied,
Conditionally Satisfied, Not Satisfied, or Not Determinable—before
those outcomes are allowed to influence any broader
Validation Determination.

→ Validation Determination Standard

→ About Validation Determination Standard