Research agenda / source of record
Canonical research questions and follow-on work. Statuses refer to the research, not completion of this website. No investigators or funding commitments are assigned.
Source revision 69be5a26a980 / built 2026-09-20T21:34:37.098Z
20 open / 0 in progress / 0 blocked / 0 done
Does pooled procurement improve price and service after dues, switching costs, and differences in privacy or quality?
Next step: Obtain matched individual and collective offers, define comparable service conditions, and preregister net-benefit measures.
Do members understand retrieval versus training permissions and successfully exercise refusal, withdrawal, and exit?
Next step: Run compensated usability studies with low-risk fictional records and test actual revocation and export workflows.
Can collective representation improve contributors' net compensation and enforceable conditions without depending indefinitely on subsidy?
Next step: Compare bounded licensing or stewardship offers, full transaction costs, repeat demand, and long-run contributor outcomes; distinguish easy contribution and multiple memberships from lawful sustained bargaining commitments.
Do benefit covenants and funding awards improve maintenance and public access without enclosing open knowledge or merely replacing existing support?
Next step: Choose matched open resources and measure additional maintenance, accessibility, steward autonomy, and continued lawful reuse.
Can buyer and supplier chambers plus an affected-party council prevent capture while keeping decisions practical and participation accessible?
Next step: Rehearse admission, fees, conflicts, data-use changes, deadlock, and exit with compensated participants; record whose decisions change.
Can collective procurement and host-community representation measurably reduce externalized energy, water, and ratepayer burdens?
Next step: Select a bounded site or procurement case, establish a credible comparison, and fund independent measurement and community review.
Which representative mandates, contract terms, enforcement resources, and competition-law routes are defensible for the selected participants and jurisdiction?
Next step: Compare existing instruments, commission local legal review, track dated litigation and standards, and test a redlined nonbinding framework before any executed pilot.
Does eligibility-first, task-specific ranking predict successful outcomes while resisting manipulation and giving qualified newcomers fair exposure?
Next step: Define held-out evaluations, public component metrics and uncertainty, and test conflicts, fake feedback, version changes, appeals, and funding for a public quality-signal core without pay-to-rank.
Can capped credits create additional public benefit at an acceptable administrative and fiscal cost without donor control, laundering, or double counting?
Next step: Specify the tax base and counterfactual, model forgone treasury revenue, and independently review eligible spending and recipient protections.
For a real application, does a governed contributor network outperform open data, direct licensing, or in-house collection on quality-adjusted total cost?
Next step: Run a narrow paid pilot, compare held-out outcomes and full costs, and measure renewals, contributor burdens, coverage, and meaningful agency.
At each node, which combination of organized demand, credible alternatives, enforceable conditions, and independent evidence changes actual control or benefit allocation?
Next step: Select a bounded node and counterparty, document the proposed lever, negotiate a measurable commitment, and test exit, audit, and remedies.
Can a professionally operated Commons Collective Federation secure an enforceable agreement and demonstrable member benefits before taking on unnecessary institutional complexity?
Next step: Choose a jurisdiction, compare public bodies and existing unions/collectives with a new federation, fund counsel and enforcement, ratify a capped mandate, and compare credible vendor offers.
Can publicly governed rubrics or reward signals improve independently measured model outcomes and collective agency without reward gaming, rights violations, or unrepresentative control?
Next step: Preregister a low-risk library-assistant study with baseline, rubric-only, and calibrated reward variants; keep evaluation independent and assess regulatory alternatives separately.
Can a bounded stack demonstrate useful capability, meaningful refusal, independent challenge, usable exit, fair accounting, and funded remedies across its components?
Next step: Specify a task and jurisdiction, document every component's accountability tuple, and independently rehearse permission, failure, complaint, payment, and migration cases.
Which combination of harness, model, tools, operating controls, and contracts delivers meaningful agency and accepted-task quality at sustainable full cost?
Next step: Complete component passports, apply eligibility gates, compare models under a fixed harness, then test harness differences and an actual supplier switch.
Will real customers renew a maintained service at prices that cover its full costs and commons commitments without enclosing existing open knowledge or using restricted money for losses?
Next step: Secure two independent paid pilots, build monthly cash and reserve scenarios, protect contributor liabilities, and test renewal and public-benefit outcomes.
Which interactions actually enter model development, under what authority, and what collective influence or benefit returns are justified compared with governed knowledge commons?
Next step: Audit account-specific policy and processing categories, define comparable contributor measures, and test procurement, feedback, and representation mechanisms without cross-platform identity tracking.
Should an existing organization be adapted or federated, or is a new sector collective justified by authority, demand, inclusion, and sustainable stewardship evidence?
Next step: Select one sector and jurisdiction, complete the unfilled profile and charter with local evidence, fund independent review, and run the 90-day and 180-day gates.
What lawful authority, confidentiality protections, custody, and successor arrangements could preserve a workplace-data trust's legitimate functions through a firm's sale, closure, or insolvency?
Next step: Select a jurisdiction, map employer/worker/third-party and creditor interests, and review contractual and institutional continuity without promising bankruptcy-proof rights.
Can book and music collecting organizations share permission-safe interfaces and appraisal methods while preserving rights, independent decisions, and lawful information exchange?
Next step: Use fictional catalogs for the Alice/Bob case, obtain competition and rights review, distinguish methods from sensitive prices, and test service and allocation responsibilities.
