v7.29 development candidate · Data as of v7.28 production

Insight Observatory: the governed corpus is growing, inspectable, and still sparse

See answer-first findings about published issue coverage, stakeholder coverage, governed linkages, evidence, gaps, and release-to-release changes—with exact numerators, denominators, methods, limitations, records, stable links, and bounded exports.

Interpretation boundary: results describe the published governed corpus, not the full real-world relationship universe. Edge counts do not measure importance, influence, harm, consensus, or causality.

Methods and limitations · v7.27→v7.28 changes · Public insight registry

Issue categoryStakeholder categoryRelationship typeAdmission laneCoverage stateEvidence unitGeographic scopeSort

71 published governed relationships in the unfiltered corpus.

What is most important to understand?

The published governed corpus expanded between v7.27 and v7.28, but it still covers only 4.2142% of canonical issues and 5.9233% of canonical stakeholders. Every finding below is inspectable and method-governed.

release changeData as of v7.28 production

v7.28 added 62 governed relationships

The governed registry changed from 9 relationships in v7.27 to 71 in v7.28: 62 were added, 9 retained, 0 changed, and 0 retired.

62numerator9denominator688.8889%

Unit: governed relationship added between archived releases
Scope: v7.27-to-v7.28-published-relationship-diff
Method: method:v729:release-relationship-diff
Underlying records: 71

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

This is a two-release change, not a trend, momentum measure, growth rate, or forecast.

Representative record IDs

59 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

issue coverageData as of v7.28 production

Published edges cover 48 of 1,139 current-taxonomy issues

48 of 1,139 canonical issues have at least one published governed relationship: 4.2142% published-edge coverage.

48numerator1,139denominator4.2142%

Unit: canonical issue with a published governed edge
Scope: all-canonical-issues-v728
Method: method:v729:issue-coverage
Underlying records: 1,139

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

Uncovered issues may be unresearched, under-evidenced, or presently unpublished; they are not proven unrelated to stakeholders.

Representative record IDs

issue:ability-to-challenge-government-evidence
issue:ability-to-present-exculpatory-evidence
issue:ability-to-submit-exculpatory-evidence
issue:absolute-immunity
issue:abuse-of-process
issue:academic-freedom-campus-pluralism-and-university-governance
issue:academic-reputation
issue:access-to-adverse-evidence
issue:access-to-counsel
issue:access-to-courts
issue:access-to-public-information
issue:access-to-underlying-evidence

1127 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

stakeholder coverageData as of v7.28 production

Published edges cover 17 of 287 stakeholders

17 of 287 canonical stakeholders have a published governed relationship; 270 currently have no published edge. Coverage is 5.9233%.

17numerator287denominator5.9233%

Unit: canonical stakeholder with a published governed edge
Scope: all-canonical-stakeholders-v728
Method: method:v729:stakeholder-coverage
Underlying records: 287

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

No published edge is a bounded publication state, not evidence of real-world irrelevance.

Representative record IDs

stakeholder:advanced-degree-liberal-civic-stakeholders
stakeholder:agricultural-workers
stakeholder:arts-and-cultural-philanthropists
stakeholder:care-workers
stakeholder:children
stakeholder:college-educated-institutional-liberal-stakeholders
stakeholder:college-educated-liberal-civic-stakeholders
stakeholder:educators
stakeholder:family-capital-and-legacy-stewards
stakeholder:film-and-television-creative-leaders
stakeholder:finance-and-investment-leaders
stakeholder:foreign-born-residents

275 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

relationship compositionData as of v7.28 production

Legal-standard edges comprise 52 of 71 relationships

The corpus contains 52 legal-standard edges, 10 statutory protection or obligation edges, and 9 retained statutory-stake edges.

52numerator71denominator73.2394%

Unit: published governed relationship
Scope: relationship-type-composition-v728
Method: method:v729:relationship-type-composition
Underlying records: 71

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

The most numerous type is not necessarily the most important type.

Representative record IDs

59 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

admission laneData as of v7.28 production

52 edges use explicit support; 19 use formal authority

52 relationships passed the explicit-support lane and 19 passed the formal-mandate or jurisdiction lane.

52numerator71denominator73.2394%

Unit: published governed relationship
Scope: admission-lane-composition-v728
Method: method:v729:admission-lane-composition
Underlying records: 71

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

The lanes encode different admission logic; they are not competing quality scores.

Representative record IDs

59 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

issue reachData as of v7.28 production

Highest published stakeholder-edge count in v7.28

4 issues tie for the highest published reach at 3 distinct governed stakeholders.

3numerator17denominator17.6471%

Unit: distinct governed stakeholder connected to an issue
Scope: issue-max-distinct-stakeholder-reach-v728
Method: method:v729:issue-published-reach
Underlying records: 4

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

This does not measure issue importance, urgency, harm, or real-world reach.

Representative record IDs

Stable link

stakeholder reachData as of v7.28 production

Highest published issue-edge count in v7.28

1 stakeholder has the highest published reach at 23 distinct governed issues.

23numerator48denominator47.9167%

Unit: distinct governed issue connected to a stakeholder
Scope: stakeholder-max-distinct-issue-reach-v728
Method: method:v729:stakeholder-published-reach
Underlying records: 1

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

This does not measure stakeholder influence, importance, representation, or belief.

Representative record IDs

stakeholder:workers

Stable link

bridge spanData as of v7.28 production

Widest published issue-category bridge span

1 stakeholder spans the maximum of 9 represented issue categories through published governed edges.

9numerator39denominator23.0769%

Unit: distinct represented canonical issue category
Scope: stakeholder-max-category-span-v728
Method: method:v729:stakeholder-category-span
Underlying records: 1

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

The bridge definition requires a published edge in each category. Sparse coverage sharply limits interpretation.

Representative record IDs

stakeholder:workers

Stable link

category pair bridgeData as of v7.28 production

Largest shared published bridge-stakeholder count

2 category pairs share the maximum of 4 distinct published bridge stakeholders.

4numerator17denominator23.5294%

Unit: distinct published bridge stakeholder
Scope: category-pair-max-bridge-stakeholders-v728
Method: method:v729:category-pair-bridge
Underlying records: 23

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

Shared published stakeholders do not establish causality or real-world category linkage.

Representative record IDs

11 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

evidence recencyData as of v7.28 production

Evidence recency uses 49 distinct supporting records

11 of 49 distinct supporting evidence records have documented publication years from 2021 through 2026; 0 have a missing publication date.

11numerator49denominator22.4490%

Unit: distinct supporting evidence record
Scope: distinct-evidence-recency-v728
Method: method:v729:evidence-recency-distinct
Underlying records: 49

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

Publication recency does not establish evidence quality, current validity, or factual certainty.

Representative record IDs

37 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

gap concentrationData as of v7.28 production

Lowest eligible category coverage is shown with ties

8 eligible issue categories tie at 0.0000% published-edge coverage under the 20-issue minimum-denominator rule.

0numerator383denominator0.0000%

Unit: canonical issue in tied eligible categories
Scope: lowest-category-coverage-minimum-20-v728
Method: method:v729:category-coverage-rate
Underlying records: 383

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

Tied categories are retained. Categories below 20 issues remain in the table but cannot be headline extremes.

Representative record IDs

issue:ability-to-challenge-government-evidence
issue:ability-to-present-exculpatory-evidence
issue:ability-to-submit-exculpatory-evidence
issue:absolute-immunity
issue:abuse-of-process
issue:access-to-adverse-evidence
issue:access-to-counsel
issue:access-to-courts
issue:access-to-public-information
issue:accountability-for-political-violence
issue:administrative-review
issue:algorithmic-profiling

371 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

research dispositionData as of v7.28 production

49 of 109 reviewed evidence records were publishable

The v7.28 review classified 49 evidence records as publishable, 31 as insufficient direct evidence, and 29 as having an ambiguous relationship type.

49numerator109denominator44.9541%

Unit: existing verified evidence record reviewed for governed relationship publication
Scope: v728-relationship-publication-disposition
Method: method:v729:disposition-evidence-records
Underlying records: 49

Why this appears and limitations

This finding is generated by a fixed template from the stated method, numerator, denominator, scope, and sorted canonical record IDs.

The 49 publishable evidence records are not one-to-one with 62 new relationship edges; one record may support multiple edges.

Representative record IDs

37 additional IDs are available through “Inspect records” and the public JSON registry.

Stable link

Bounded relationship flow

Published edges connect canonical issue categories to governed relationship types and stakeholder categories. This is a corpus composition view, not a causal pathway.

Relationship type

Relationship type	Count	Denominator	Share
reltype:governed-statutory-stake	9	71	12.6761%
reltype:legal-standard-applies-to-role	52	71	73.2394%
reltype:statutory-protection-or-obligation	10	71	14.0845%

Inspect the Linkages view and complete accessible matrices →

Intersectional Themes

This view identifies shared published stakeholder participation across issue categories. It does not create user-defined intersections, infer similarity, or establish causality.

Sparse-data safeguard: only 48 of 1,139 current-taxonomy issues and 17 of 287 stakeholders currently have published edges.

Category-pair bridge matrix

A bridge stakeholder has at least one published governed relationship in both categories. Values count distinct stakeholder IDs; every row has an exact record drill-down.

Category A	Category B	Distinct bridge stakeholders	Contributing issues	Relationships
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	4	5	8
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	Structural & Systemic Racism	4	9	15
Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	3	4	8
Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	3	3	8
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	2	6	6
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	6	6
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	2	6	6
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	6	6
Media, Technology & Capital	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	5	5
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	2	2	4
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	3	5
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	2	18	20
Structural & Systemic Racism	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	2	15	16
Care, Health, Family & Social Infrastructure	Economy, Care & Climate	1	2	2
Care, Health, Family & Social Infrastructure	Technology, AI, Data & Platform Governance	1	2	2
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	1	2	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	1	2	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	1	2	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Racial Minority Issues	1	2	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Religious Minority Safety & Pluralism	1	2	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	1	4	5
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Structural & Systemic Racism	1	3	4
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	13	14
Economy, Care & Climate	Technology, AI, Data & Platform Governance	1	2	2

Bridge-stakeholder ranking

Measured quantity: distinct represented canonical issue categories through published governed edges. Exact ties are preserved.

Stakeholder	Issue categories	Issues	Relationships
Workers	9	23	24
K–12 students	7	8	8
Women	4	9	9
Foreign-born residents	3	4	4
Noncitizen residents	3	4	4
Children	3	3	3
Postsecondary students	3	3	3
Renters	2	3	3
People subject to automated public decisions	2	2	2
Military families	1	3	3
Voters	1	2	2
Agricultural workers	1	1	1
Educators and educational staff	1	1	1
Healthcare workers	1	1	1
Paid care workers	1	1	1
People with disabilities	1	1	1
Transportation and logistics workers	1	1	1

Issues

48 canonical issues currently have published governed stakeholder coverage; 1,091 have an explicit coverage-gap state. The gap state means no v7.28 evidence review has established a typed edge, not that no real-world relationship exists.

Covered issues

Issue	Category	Relationships	Distinct stakeholders
Immigrant Worker Rights	Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	3	3
Latinidad Worker Power & Labor Standards	Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	3	3
Structural Gender Inequality	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	3	3
Women in Healthcare & Care Work	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	3	3
Asylum Access & Due Process	Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	2	2
Educational Opportunity Gaps	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	2
Employment Reputation	Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	2	1
Entry, Retention & Promotion	Military Service, Veterans & Military Families	2	2
Fair-Housing Enforcement	Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	2	2
Gender Pay Gap	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	2	2
Indo-Tibetan Migration, Asylum & Consular Access	Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	2	2
Military Family Care & Mobility	Military Service, Veterans & Military Families	2	2
Pay Inequality for Women of Color	Structural & Systemic Racism	2	2
Pregnancy Discrimination	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	2	2
Racially Discriminatory Education Rules	Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	2	2
Women in Agriculture & Food Systems	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	2	2
Women in Education & Academia	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	2	2
Women in Transportation & Logistics	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	2	2
Women’s Military Service Conditions	Military Service, Veterans & Military Families	2	2
Algorithmic Discrimination & Surveillance	Structural & Systemic Racism	1	1
Algorithmic Public Systems	Media, Technology & Capital	1	1
Child Welfare, Foster Care & Youth Development	Care, Health, Family & Social Infrastructure	1	1
Childcare & Early Learning	Economy, Care & Climate	1	1
Childcare, Eldercare, Leave & Household Decision-Making	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	1	1
Indo-Tibetan Youth, Education & Belonging	Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	1	1
Interracial-Association Housing Exclusion	Racial Hate, Hostility & Dehumanization	1	1
K–12 Quality, School Finance & Educator Capacity	Education, Science & Knowledge	1	1
Latinidad Education Pathways	Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	1	1
Maternal Health Equity	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Pay Equity & Occupational Mobility	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Racial Employment Discrimination	Structural & Systemic Racism	1	1
Racial Housing Restrictions	Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	1	1
Racial Voting Restrictions	Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	1	1
Religious Accommodation at Work	Religious Minority Safety & Pluralism	1	1
Research & Editorial Independence	Media, Technology & Capital	1	1
Unequal Resource Allocation & Public Investment	Structural & Systemic Racism	1	1
Voting-Rights Protection	Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	1	1
Women in Finance & Professional Services	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Hospitality, Retail & Service Work	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Communities	Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	1	1
Women in Law, Courts & Public Safety	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Manufacturing & Industrial Work	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Media, Arts & Entertainment	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Skilled Trades & Construction	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Women in Technology & Engineering	Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	1	1
Workplace Leadership, Bargaining, Governance & Accountability	Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	1	1
Workplace Racial Equity	Racial Minority Issues	1	1
Youth Digital Wellbeing & Online Safety	Technology, AI, Data & Platform Governance	1	1

Issue-category coverage

Rates always show covered issues and total canonical issues. The 20-issue minimum applies only to headline extremes.

Issue category	Covered issues	All issues	Published-edge coverage	Relationships	Headline status
Apartheid, Segregation & Unequal Citizenship	0	6	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Arts, Culture & Public Memory	0	4	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Bi-National & Heritage-Nation Issues	0	8	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Black Life, African American Equity & Civic Power	0	8	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Capital, Philanthropy & Institutional Stewardship	0	5	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Care, Health, Family & Social Infrastructure	1	7	14.2857%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Civil Liberties, Conscience & Expression	0	37	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Climate, Environment, Land & Resilience	0	5	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	1	145	0.6897%	2	Eligible
Democracy & Public Institutions	0	20	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Democracy, Elections & Civic Participation	0	20	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Disability Rights & Independent Living	0	3	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Due Process, Courts, Evidence & Access to Remedy	0	73	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Economy, Care & Climate	1	8	12.5000%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Economy, Labor, Wealth & Mobility	0	5	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Education, Science & Knowledge	1	4	25.0000%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Emergency Powers, Detention & National Security	0	8	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Equal Protection, Selective Enforcement & Public Administration	0	48	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Global Affairs, Humanitarian Action & Human Rights	0	5	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	2	8	25.0000%	5	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	3	12	25.0000%	4	Below 20-issue headline threshold
LGBTQ+ Equality, Safety & Belonging	0	8	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	2	8	25.0000%	4	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Media, Narrative & Information Integrity	0	12	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Media, Technology & Capital	2	20	10.0000%	2	Eligible
Military Service, Veterans & Military Families	3	12	25.0000%	6	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Public Safety, Policing & Criminal Legal Systems	0	85	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Racial Hate, Hostility & Dehumanization	1	155	0.6452%	1	Eligible
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	5	146	3.4247%	7	Eligible
Racial Minority Issues	1	8	12.5000%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Regional & Place-Based Issues	0	16	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Religion & Religious Power	0	57	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Religious Minority Safety & Pluralism	1	8	12.5000%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Structural & Systemic Antisemitism	0	6	0.0000%	0	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	5	46	10.8696%	9	Eligible
Structural & Systemic Racism	5	45	11.1111%	7	Eligible
Surveillance, Intelligence, Privacy & Data Rights	0	43	0.0000%	0	Eligible
Technology, AI, Data & Platform Governance	1	5	20.0000%	1	Below 20-issue headline threshold
Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	13	20	65.0000%	18	Eligible

Linkages

The 71 published relationships use three governed types and two evidence-admission lanes. These counts describe the corpus; they do not measure real-world prevalence or influence.

Relationship type

Relationship type	Count	Denominator	Share
reltype:governed-statutory-stake	9	71	12.6761%
reltype:legal-standard-applies-to-role	52	71	73.2394%
reltype:statutory-protection-or-obligation	10	71	14.0845%

Admission lane

Admission lane	Count	Denominator	Share
EXPLICIT_SUPPORT	52	71	73.2394%
FORMAL_MANDATE_OR_JURISDICTION	19	71	26.7606%

Issue category × stakeholder category

Each nonzero row counts published governed relationships. The table is the complete accessible alternative to the bounded flow view.

Issue category	Stakeholder category	Relationships
Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	work-and-economic-role	17
Military Service, Veterans & Military Families	community-identity	6
Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	migration-language-heritage	4
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	community-identity	4
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	work-and-economic-role	3
Structural & Systemic Racism	education-and-digital-access	3
Defamation, Reputation & False Attribution	work-and-economic-role	2
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	migration-language-heritage	2
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	migration-language-heritage	2
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	civic-legal-institutional	2
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	education-and-digital-access	2
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	housing-position	2
Structural & Systemic Gender Inequality	education-and-digital-access	2
Structural & Systemic Racism	work-and-economic-role	2
Care, Health, Family & Social Infrastructure	life-stage	1
Economy, Care & Climate	life-stage	1
Education, Science & Knowledge	education-and-digital-access	1
Immigration, Refuge & Displacement	work-and-economic-role	1
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	education-and-digital-access	1
Indo-Tibetan & Himalayan Issues	work-and-economic-role	1
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	education-and-digital-access	1
Latinidad, Hispanic & Latine Issues	work-and-economic-role	1
Media, Technology & Capital	civic-legal-institutional	1
Media, Technology & Capital	education-and-digital-access	1
Racial Hate, Hostility & Dehumanization	housing-position	1
Racial Hierarchy, Supremacy & Structural Inequality	disability-and-access	1
Racial Minority Issues	work-and-economic-role	1
Religious Minority Safety & Pluralism	work-and-economic-role	1
Structural & Systemic Racism	civic-legal-institutional	1
Structural & Systemic Racism	community-identity	1
Technology, AI, Data & Platform Governance	life-stage	1
Women’s Rights, Safety & Civic Power	community-identity	1

Corpus

The published relationship corpus is inspectable but sparse: 71 edges cover 48 of 1,139 current-taxonomy issues and 17 of 287 stakeholders, supported by 49 distinct evidence records.

4.2142%issue published-edge coverage · 48/1,139

5.9233%stakeholder published-edge coverage · 17/287

49distinct supporting evidence records

71edge–evidence associations

Evidence recency

Selected evidence unit: Distinct evidence records. Date and authority distributions use distinct evidence records because those are evidence-record attributes; selecting edge–evidence associations changes the active-state label and export metadata without duplicating these distributions. Missing dates remain separate. Recency does not establish quality.

Publication-year bucket	Count	Denominator
2010 Or Earlier	38	49 distinct evidence records
2021 To 2026	11	49 distinct evidence records

Existing evidence-authority classifications

No composite score is created. Authority classification does not establish factual certainty.

Authority class	Count	Denominator
PRIMARY	35	49 distinct evidence records
PRIMARY_OFFICIAL	14	49 distinct evidence records

Research disposition

Accounting unit: existing verified evidence record reviewed for governed relationship publication.

Disposition	Evidence records
Publishable	49
Insufficient direct evidence	31
Ambiguous relationship type	29
Total reviewed	109

One publishable evidence record may support more than one issue–stakeholder–type edge; 49 publishable evidence records therefore reconcile with 62 new edges without a one-to-one relationship.

Inspect the complete v7.27→v7.28 release comparison →

Loading the independent-dimension Research Leverage projection…

Active public records

Open a detailed view or apply filters to load the compact drill-down index. Selecting “No published edge” loads canonical issue gap rows rather than manufacturing relationship records. The initial Overview does not load the full record index.