Home

VI. Manuscript

Template

[TITLE OF THE REPORT]

Full Author List

  • First Author, ORCID: [0000-0000-0000-0000], Institutional Affiliation, Email

  • Co-Authors, ORCID(s), Institutional Affiliations

Note: All author names must exactly match ORCID and Zenodo account profiles for DOI traceability.

Corridor and Clause Passport Metadata

  • Corridor Name: (e.g., Lower Mekong Flood Corridor)

  • Scenario Version: v1.0

Abstract

A concise, policy-relevant summary (200–300 words) that clearly states the scenario’s purpose, context within the specified corridor, principal methods and data sources, key results, operational fallback mechanisms, and the anticipated contribution to sovereign risk governance.

Keywords

Provide 5–8 keywords that reflect the scenario’s hazard type, geographic focus, methodological innovations, and relevance to Nexus modules and treaty contexts. Example: tropical cyclone corridor, fallback scenario, clause passport, parametric trigger, sovereign risk finance.

1. Introduction

Clearly situate the scenario within the broader hazard and policy landscape. Explain:

  • The motivation for this assessment scenario: historical or emerging risk drivers, governance gaps, or treaty alignment needs.

  • How this scenario complements or extends existing corridor risk intelligence.

  • The intended governance users: corridor operators, national working groups (NWGs), treaty secretariats, or resilience finance stakeholders.

2. Corridor Context and Policy Alignment

Provide a detailed narrative of:

  • The corridor’s geographic boundaries, hazard characteristics, and key socio-economic or ecological vulnerabilities.

  • The legal and policy instruments that frame this scenario’s operational use — cite relevant corridor treaties, national DRM policies, or regional insurance pools.

  • Stakeholder and community co-design where applicable.

3. Data and Methods

3.1 Data Sources

Enumerate all primary and secondary data inputs, including:

  • Origin and collection dates.

  • Temporal and spatial resolution.

  • Licensing status (must be open or documented with permission).

3.2 Analytical Methods

Describe clearly:

  • Scenario development framework, modelling approach, and assumptions.

  • Clause indexing and fallback logic design.

  • Any stress test or ensemble techniques employed to validate robustness.

3.3 Computational Environment

State:

  • Software packages, versions, analytical pipelines.

  • Containerization or virtual machine configuration if used.

4. Clause Matrix

Embed a summary table detailing all clause conditions critical to corridor operation and fallback governance. Use a standard format:

Clause ID
Trigger Condition
Threshold
Data Source
Fallback Activation
Notes

C1

Rainfall exceeds 250mm/24h

250mm

National Radar Network

Fallback F1 engaged

Valid for sub-corridor Zone 3

  • Save a complete clause matrix as .csv and attach as supplementary material.

5. Results

Present the scenario’s key findings clearly and systematically:

  • Maps and figures showing hazard intensities, trigger zones, or corridor impact layers.

  • Tables summarizing parameter ranges, model outputs, and fallback success rates under test conditions.

  • State results in plain language, clarifying implications for corridor operators.

6. Discussion

Critically interpret:

  • How findings refine corridor understanding and operational thresholds.

  • Limitations, assumptions, or uncertainties relevant for corridor deployment.

  • Comparison with similar scenarios or past corridor assessments.

  • Recommendations for corridor SOPs or treaty annex refinements.

7. Fallback Scenario Documentation

Provide an explicit narrative summary:

  • Describe each fallback scenario: when and how it activates.

  • Summarize contingency pathways for data loss or unexpected hazard escalations.

  • Link fallback conditions directly to clause matrix entries.

8. Community Relevance and Equity Considerations

Articulate:

  • Specific benefits to vulnerable populations, including gender and Indigenous dimensions where relevant.

  • Evidence of community co-design or local knowledge integration.

  • Mechanisms for accessible dissemination (e.g., local translations, open dashboards).

9. Generative AI Use Statement

Declare any AI usage clearly:

“This scenario includes model refinements generated with large language models, which were independently validated by the authors in accordance with Nexus AI Disclosure Policy.”

If none, state plainly:

“No generative AI tools were used in the design or writing of this scenario.”

10. Funding and Acknowledgements

Disclose:

  • Funding bodies, grant IDs, institutional support.

  • Corridor operators, NWGs, community groups, or civic councils that contributed substantive inputs.

11. Author Contributions

Use the CRediT taxonomy or equivalent:

Role
Contributor

Conceptualization

Author 1

Methodology

Author 1, Author 2

Data Curation

Author 2

Writing – Original Draft

Author 1

Writing – Review & Editing

All authors

Governance Liaison

Author 1

12. Data and Code Availability

Provide:

  • Explicit DOI-linked URL to the Zenodo record.

  • Note that all raw data, scripts, fallback modules, and clause matrices are openly accessible under the stated license.

  • If embargoed exceptions apply, explain with governance justification.

13. References

List all cited works using a consistent citation style (APA, IEEE, or other standard used by Nexus Reports). Ensure each data source and policy document has a permanent identifier if possible.

✅ Required Supplementary Materials

Must be attached to the Zenodo upload:

  • Final PDF manuscript matching this template.

  • Complete Clause Matrix (.csv).

  • Data files (.csv, .json, .geojson, .nc, etc.).

  • Fallback logic scripts or notebooks (.py, .Rmd, etc.).

  • README.md with step-by-step reproducibility instructions.

  • Checksums for large files to guarantee integrity.

Editorial Note

All scenario manuscripts must conform strictly to this template. Deviations that compromise clause index clarity, fallback reproducibility, or corridor operational traceability may result in editorial revision requests or rejection prior to corridor passport issuance.

Standard Clause Matrix Template

Purpose: The Clause Matrix is the authoritative record of each scenario’s clause-indexed operational conditions. It defines each corridor trigger, the precise threshold that activates fallback or contingency plans, the verified data source for validation, and cross-references to fallback logic modules. This matrix ensures every scenario is enforceable under the Nexus Sovereignty Framework and reproducible for corridor operators, national working groups (NWGs), treaty secretariats, and parametric insurance audits.

This template must be completed in full and attached to every Nexus Reports scenario submission as a separate .csv or .xlsx file, in addition to being summarized within the manuscript narrative.

Recommended Clause Matrix Structure

Field Name
Required
Description

Version

Yes

Scenario version tag (e.g., v1.0, v1.1). Must match manuscript, fallback scripts, and Zenodo DOI metadata.

Corridor ID

Yes

Official corridor name or unique ID (e.g., IndusFlood2025).

Clause ID

Yes

Unique, sequential identifier for each clause (e.g., C-1, C-2). Stable across updates.

Condition Description

Yes

Plain-language description of the operational condition governed by this clause.

Trigger Variable

Yes

The specific monitored variable or parameter (e.g., Rainfall, River Discharge, Sensor Status).

Threshold Value

Yes

Exact numeric threshold or condition that activates this clause (e.g., Rainfall > 250 mm in 24 hours).

Data Source

Yes

Authoritative source or sensor network that supplies the trigger variable (e.g., National Meteorological Department Radar, Sentinel-1).

Fallback Plan ID

Yes

The designated fallback plan or contingency module to be activated when the clause condition is met or data fails (e.g., F1, F2).

Notes/Comments

Optional

Any additional clarifications, such as sub-corridor zones, operator overrides, or historical context.

Sample Clause Matrix

Version
Corridor ID
Clause ID
Condition Description
Trigger Variable
Threshold Value
Data Source
Fallback Plan ID
Notes/Comments

v1.0

IndusFlood2025

C-1

Extreme rainfall triggers urban flood warning

Rainfall

> 250 mm in 24 hours

IMD Radar Grid

F1

Applies to Urban Subzone A

v1.0

IndusFlood2025

C-2

Sensor outage longer than 1 hour activates fallback model

Sensor Status

No data for 1 hour

Local Sensor Network 12

F2

Fallback runs ensemble forecast

v1.0

IndusFlood2025

C-3

River discharge exceeds safe flow threshold

Discharge

> 4,500 m³/s

Indus River Gauge #5

F3

Valid for Downstream Zone B

Completion Guidelines

  • Use these exact column headers for .csv or .xlsx formats to maintain machine readability for corridor replay engines and clause passport validators.

  • The Version must be consistent with the manuscript front page, Zenodo metadata, and all attached fallback scenario scripts.

  • Each clause must appear as a single row. Do not merge multiple conditions into one entry.

  • The Fallback Plan ID must align with identifiers used in your fallback logic scripts and described in the manuscript’s Fallback Scenario section.

  • The file must be uploaded alongside your manuscript and other required scenario assets to Zenodo.

Allowed File Formats

  • CSV file (UTF-8 encoded, standard comma-separated).

  • Excel workbook (.xlsx) for human readability, with clear sheet labeling.

  • RDF/JSON-LD or Turtle formats may be provided in addition for advanced corridor governance integrations, but never as a substitute for the core CSV.

Governance Note

This Clause Matrix is enforceable under the Nexus Sovereignty Framework. Failure to maintain version alignment, data source integrity, or fallback plan cross-references may result in rejection, clause passport suspension, or retraction under corridor governance protocols.

Fallback Scenario Logic Design Guide

Purpose: Every Nexus Reports scenario must include robust fallback mechanisms to ensure operational continuity during data loss, sensor outages, or unexpected hazard escalation within a corridor. This guide provides structured design principles, recommended logic structures, stress test best practices, and reproducibility checklists for building fallback layers that are legally enforceable and technically verifiable under the Nexus Sovereignty Framework.

1. Core Principles for Fallback Logic

A robust fallback scenario must be:

  • Deterministic: Logic conditions must produce the same outputs for the same inputs, minimizing stochastic ambiguity during real-time corridor operations.

  • Automated: Activation conditions should be clearly defined and executable without manual intervention once a clause threshold is breached.

  • Transparent: All logic trees and threshold parameters must be documented and published alongside the main scenario record.

  • Stress-Tested: Fallback conditions must be tested under simulated corridor disruption conditions to verify correctness.

  • Reproducible: Other corridor operators must be able to rerun the fallback logic independently, using the same published code and input assumptions.

2. Recommended Fallback Structures

Fallback design should typically use a tiered logic tree. A standard structure includes:

Example Tiered Fallback Tree:

  1. Primary Trigger: Condition: Main hazard variable exceeds operational threshold. Action: Primary scenario activates real-time alerts.

  2. Fallback Level 1: Condition: Primary sensor network outage detected for X minutes. Action: Switch to secondary sensor feed or trusted remote sensing dataset.

  3. Fallback Level 2: Condition: Secondary feed unavailable or corrupted. Action: Activate pre-configured ensemble model or historical scenario replay.

  4. Fallback Level 3 (Last Resort): Condition: All real-time feeds fail concurrently for Y duration. Action: Engage corridor contingency plan, notify local emergency services, deploy manual field monitoring.

Each fallback tier should be referenced in the Clause Matrix by its unique Fallback Plan ID.

3. Logic Design Recommendations

When designing fallback logic, adhere to the following practices:

  • Modular Code: Implement fallback layers as modular, callable functions or scripts with clear input/output parameters.

  • Minimal External Dependencies: Reduce reliance on hard-to-maintain third-party APIs; prefer local models or well-documented open data streams.

  • Human-Readable: Include comments and clear variable naming for future scenario maintainers and corridor operators.

  • Version Control: Use robust version control (e.g., Git) for fallback scripts. Tag releases that correspond exactly to scenario versions in Zenodo.

4. Stress Test Protocol

Before finalizing your fallback design:

  1. Simulate Primary Data Loss: Temporarily disable or corrupt input files to confirm fallback activation triggers correctly.

  2. Test Threshold Sensitivity: Adjust input values near activation limits to verify smooth transitions between tiers.

  3. Monitor Runtime Performance: Ensure fallback models run within corridor operators’ operational latency requirements.

  4. Verify Logging: Confirm fallback scripts generate logs or console outputs documenting which tier was triggered and why.

  5. Document Anomalies: Record any unexpected behaviors and refine logic accordingly.

5. Reproducibility Checklist

Every fallback package must include:

  • All Source Scripts: Complete, executable code for every fallback tier.

  • Config Files: Clear parameter files for easy scenario replay.

  • Sample Input Data: A minimal test dataset to demonstrate fallback activation.

  • README.md: Step-by-step instructions for running fallback layers manually and interpreting outputs.

  • Checksums: Integrity checks for large files.

6. Governance Assurance

Each fallback plan is part of your scenario’s sovereign clause passport. If a corridor operator, NWG, or treaty secretariat cannot reproduce fallback behavior exactly as described, the scenario may be suspended or invalidated for operational use.

To protect corridor trust:

  • Keep fallback logic as simple and deterministic as possible.

  • Document fallback triggers clearly in both the Clause Matrix and scenario manuscript.

  • Maintain backward compatibility: changes to fallback logic must be versioned and properly linked to the scenario’s Zenodo DOI chain.

7. Example Fallback Logic Snippet

Example (Pseudocode):

def fallback_tier1(primary_data, secondary_data):
    if primary_data is None:
        if secondary_data is not None:
            return secondary_data
        else:
            return run_ensemble_model()
    else:
        return primary_data

8. Required Deliverables

For each scenario submitted to Nexus Reports, attach:

  • fallback_tierX.py or equivalent scripts

  • Configuration file (config.yml or .json)

  • Test data file (test_inputs.csv)

  • Execution log sample (example_log.txt)

  • Detailed README.md with usage instructions

Key Principle

Fallback logic is the corridor’s guarantee that sovereign risk intelligence remains operational even under system stress. Each layer you build is a legal and technical safety net — designed not only for computational rigor but for real-world lives and treaty enforcement.

Pre-Submission Compliance Checklist

Purpose: This checklist must be completed and reviewed internally by the corresponding Scenario Fellow before final upload to Zenodo. It verifies that the manuscript, data files, fallback modules, clause matrix, licensing, and governance metadata all meet Nexus Reports standards for corridor replay and clause passport validity.

Each item must be confirmed as Yes or N/A where appropriate. Retain this checklist in your scenario stewardship log as part of your version chain-of-custody.

1. Manuscript and Clause Matrix

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

Final manuscript uses the approved Nexus Reports template (see Appendix A2).

Title page includes version tag, corridor ID, and intended clause passport.

Clause Matrix is complete, correctly formatted, and attached as .csv or .xlsx.

Clause IDs match fallback script references and manuscript text.

2. Fallback Logic and Scripts

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

All fallback logic layers are coded as modular, executable scripts.

Scripts are commented, version-tagged, and tested for reproducibility.

README.md is included with clear run instructions and parameter explanations.

Sample input data and stress test results are included.

3. Data Files and Formats

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

All input and output data files are in open, standard formats (.csv, .json, .geojson, .nc).

File names include corridor ID and version tag (e.g., IndusFlood_v1.0.csv).

Checksums provided for large files (>5 GB) to ensure data integrity.

4. Licensing and Open Access

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

All files are covered by an approved open license (e.g., CC BY 4.0 or MIT for code).

No proprietary or restricted data included without documented permissions.

Generative AI usage, if any, is disclosed explicitly in the manuscript’s AI Use Statement.

5. Zenodo Community and Metadata

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

Zenodo account is linked to the primary author’s ORCID iD.

The Nexus Reports Community (https://zenodo.org/communities/nexusreports/) is correctly selected.

Title, author list, keywords, and funding details in Zenodo match the manuscript exactly.

Related Identifiers are added for any predecessor versions, source datasets, or Git repositories.

6. Final Governance Check

Item
Confirmation (Yes/No/N/A)

Impact reporting plan prepared (see Section 4.1) with clear indicators.

Compliance Monitoring and Replay Audit plan confirmed (see Section 4.5).

Internal version log updated and archived.

Certification

By completing this checklist, I confirm that this scenario submission complies with all Nexus Reports corridor governance standards and is ready for sovereign clause passport certification.

Name: ORCID iD: Institution: Date:

Governance Note

This checklist may be requested by the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat or any corridor operator during compliance monitoring, scenario replay audits, or treaty validation reviews.

Impact Reporting Form Template

Purpose: This form must be completed at minimum once every 12 months for each active scenario under an issued clause passport. It documents the scenario’s real-world deployment, operational adoption by corridor stakeholders, fallback activations, and measurable community outcomes. Completed forms are retained in the Fellow’s stewardship log and submitted to the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat and corridor operators upon request.

1. Report Identification

Field
Required Entry

Scenario Title

Corridor ID

Current Scenario Version

Clause Passport ID

Reporting Period (Start–End Dates)

Scenario Fellow Name

ORCID iD

Institutional Affiliation

Contact Email

2. Deployment Metrics

Provide factual, quantifiable evidence for how and where the scenario has been deployed.

Metric
Required Entry

Number of corridor hazard zones where scenario is actively in use

Names of corridor operators or agencies using the scenario

Number of NWGs or treaty secretariats officially referencing this scenario

Dates and zones where fallback scenarios were activated

Summary of fallback performance or anomalies during activation

3. Community Benefit Indicators

Explain tangible benefits to affected populations, using both quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Indicator
Required Entry

Description of risk reduction outcomes (e.g., earlier warnings, lives protected, property damage avoided)

Estimated number of people directly benefiting

Evidence of community engagement or co-design (e.g., meetings held, training conducted)

Any local language or culturally adapted materials provided

Attach supporting documentation where appropriate: operator reports, dashboard screenshots, press releases, or signed statements from local councils.

4. Lessons Learned

Briefly summarise operational insights gained during this reporting period.

Field
Required Entry

Key operational challenges encountered

Changes recommended for scenario logic or fallback layers

Stakeholder or community recommendations received

5. Impact Validation and Supporting Files

List any attached files submitted as supporting evidence for this report.

File Type
Filename(s)

Corridor operator confirmation letter(s)

Fallback activation logs

Community engagement summary or meeting minutes

Media coverage or public announcements (optional)

6. Declaration and Submission

Fellow Declaration: By submitting this report, I affirm that the information provided is accurate, verifiable, and complies with the Nexus Reports governance standards for corridor scenario impact reporting.

Field
Entry

Fellow’s Signature

Date

Submission Instructions

  • Save this form as PDF or DOCX.

  • Submit electronically to the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat via the official corridor governance portal or direct Secretariat email.

  • Retain a local copy in your scenario stewardship log for audit purposes.

Governance Note

Failure to submit this report annually may result in suspension of the scenario’s clause passport, removal from corridor operator dashboards, or breach notifications to treaty secretariats and funding partners.

Governance Audit Replay Certificate Template

Purpose: This certificate verifies that a given version of a Nexus Reports scenario has been re-executed under conditions equivalent to its original published state, producing consistent results within the documented margin of error. This is mandatory evidence for corridor clause passport validity and sovereign treaty enforcement.

1. Scenario and Corridor Identification

Field
Required Entry

Scenario Title

Corridor ID

Current Scenario Version

Clause Passport ID

Zenodo DOI

Replay Check Date

Replay Performed By (Name)

ORCID iD

Institutional Affiliation

Contact Email

2. Replay Environment

Parameter
Required Entry

Software/Library Versions Used

System Configuration (e.g., OS, hardware specs)

Container or Virtual Machine Details (if applicable)

3. Replay Results

Parameter
Required Entry

Were all scenario files sourced directly from the published Zenodo record? (Yes/No)

Did the scenario run successfully with no missing dependencies? (Yes/No)

Did the outputs match published results within the stated margin of error? (Yes/No)

Margin of numerical variance observed (if any)

Were all fallback layers tested and activated as designed? (Yes/No)

Summary of test log findings

4. Supporting Evidence

Attach the following with this certificate as a single package:

  • Execution logs showing console outputs and timestamps.

  • Output files or key result snapshots.

  • Checksums of input and output files.

  • Any updated README or configuration notes if environment replication required minor adjustments.

5. Declaration

I hereby certify that this replay check was conducted according to the Nexus Reports governance standards. The scenario’s logic and fallback modules are reproducible and operationally valid for corridor clause passport enforcement as of the date below.

Field
Entry

Fellow’s Signature

Date

6. Optional Corridor Operator Endorsement

This section may be countersigned by the relevant corridor operator or NWG representative for additional treaty-level validation.

Field
Entry

Operator Name

Title/Role

Organization

Signature

Date

Submission and Storage

  • Retain a copy of this certificate in your scenario stewardship log.

  • Provide a copy to the corridor operator or treaty secretariat if requested.

  • Upload as a supplementary file to Zenodo if issuing a corrected or updated scenario version based on replay findings.

Governance Note

Inadequate replay documentation is grounds for clause passport suspension and may trigger corridor scenario retraction during governance audits.

Fellowship Endorsement Statement

Purpose: This statement serves as an official confirmation by an experienced Scenario Fellow or recognized supervisor that a new Fellow has been properly trained in Nexus corridor scenario development, clause passport compliance, fallback logic design, and open science publishing protocols, and is prepared to submit an independent scenario under Nexus Reports for the first time.

A signed copy must be uploaded with the scenario submission package and retained in both the senior Fellow’s and the new Fellow’s scenario stewardship log.

1. New Fellow Details

Field
Required Entry

New Fellow’s Full Name

ORCID iD

Institutional Affiliation

Contact Email

2. Scenario Publication Details

Field
Required Entry

Scenario Title

Intended Corridor ID

Proposed Scenario Version

Zenodo DOI (if pre-reserved)

3. Endorsement Declaration

By signing this statement, I confirm that:

  1. I have supervised or closely mentored the above-named Fellow during the development of the scenario named herein.

  2. I have personally reviewed the manuscript, Clause Matrix, fallback logic, version control, reproducibility documentation, and governance metadata for compliance with Nexus Reports standards.

  3. I certify that the scenario is corridor-ready, clause passport-eligible, and suitable for public release under open licensing as required by the Nexus Sovereignty Framework.

  4. I agree to remain available to support the new Fellow in addressing any post-publication governance queries or compliance checks for this version.

4. Endorser Details

Field
Required Entry

Endorser’s Full Name

ORCID iD

Institutional Affiliation

Contact Email

5. Signatures

Field
Entry

Endorser’s Signature

Date

New Fellow’s Signature

Date

Submission Instructions

  • Attach this signed statement as part of the new scenario’s supplementary materials in Zenodo.

  • Retain a signed copy in both the endorser’s and the new Fellow’s scenario stewardship logs for governance audits.

  • Submit an electronic copy to the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat if requested during the clause passport review process.

Governance Note

Improper sponsorship or endorsement of unqualified scenarios may result in clause passport denial, governance audit review, and suspension of the endorser’s mentorship privileges under the Fellowship Charter.

Dispute Resolution Request Form

Purpose: This form initiates a formal review by the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat and, if required, the Sovereign Governance Review Panel. It ensures that all ethics concerns, clause passport integrity issues, or governance disputes are handled transparently, fairly, and in compliance with the Nexus Sovereignty Framework.

1. Complainant Information

Field
Required Entry

Name

Affiliation (e.g., corridor operator, NWG, treaty secretariat, registered Fellow)

ORCID iD (if applicable)

Contact Email

Preferred Contact Method (email, phone, etc.)

2. Scenario Under Review

Field
Required Entry

Scenario Title

Corridor ID

Version Number

Clause Passport ID (if known)

Zenodo DOI

3. Nature of the Dispute or Allegation

Check all that apply:

4. Detailed Description

Provide a clear, factual account of the issue. Include:

  • Specific clauses, fallback triggers, or scenario outputs in question.

  • Dates and context of the incident(s).

  • Any actions taken to resolve the issue informally, if applicable.

[Text box / narrative space]

5. Supporting Evidence

List or attach any evidence that supports this request, such as:

  • Correspondence

  • Screenshots

  • Logs

  • Comparison of scenario outputs

  • Witness statements

File Name
Description

6. Desired Resolution

Indicate what resolution you are requesting, such as:

  • Correction and new version issuance

  • Clause passport suspension pending investigation

  • Formal retraction and public notice

  • Governance mediation session

  • Other (specify)

[Text box]

7. Declaration

By submitting this form, I affirm that:

  • The information provided is truthful and complete to the best of my knowledge.

  • I understand that the Nexus Reports Secretariat may share necessary details with relevant governance bodies to resolve this matter fairly.

Field
Entry

Complainant Signature

Date

8. Submission Instructions

  • Email the completed form and all supporting documents to the Nexus Reports Editorial Secretariat at [official governance email address].

  • Mark the subject line as: “Dispute Resolution Request — [Scenario Title / Corridor ID]”.

  • Retain a copy for your institutional or corridor governance records.

Governance Note

False or malicious submissions may result in formal governance sanctions under the Nexus Sovereignty Framework. All legitimate submissions will be treated with confidentiality and investigated promptly according to Section 5.5.

Knowledge Commons Contribution Log

Purpose: This log serves as an official tracking record for every reusable module, fallback script, generative AI prompt archive, or cross-corridor scenario fork contributed by a Nexus Scenario Fellow. Maintaining this record helps ensure:

  • Open license compliance

  • Accurate citation of DOIs and original repositories

  • Clear version lineage for corridor operators and treaty audits

  • Reliable reproducibility during clause passport replay checks

Each Fellow must maintain an up-to-date copy of this log within their scenario stewardship folder and attach the relevant portions to major Zenodo submissions when appropriate.

1. Contributor Identification

Field
Required Entry

Fellow’s Full Name

ORCID iD

Institutional Affiliation

Contact Email

Primary Corridor ID (if applicable)

2. Contribution Log Table

Each row represents one discrete knowledge asset: for example, a fallback script, a reusable function library, a machine learning prompt set, or a forked scenario variant.

Field
Required per Row

Contribution ID

Unique ID (e.g., KC-001, KC-002)

Title/Name of Asset

Short descriptive title

Type

[ ] Fallback Script, [ ] Code Module, [ ] AI Prompt Archive, [ ] Cross-Corridor Fork, [ ] Other

Linked Scenario DOI

Example: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9876543

License Type

e.g., MIT, CC BY 4.0

Version Tag

e.g., v1.0, v1.1

Location/Repository

Example: https://github.com/NexusUser/scenario-fallback-tier2

Description

Short purpose summary

Date Created

Last Updated

Forked From

If derivative, list source DOI or repository link

Associated Clause ID(s)

Note relevant Clause Matrix ID(s)

Notes/Comments

Optional clarifications

3. Sample Log Entry

Field
Example Entry

Contribution ID

KC-007

Title/Name of Asset

Tier 2 Rainfall Fallback Ensemble

Type

Fallback Script

Linked Scenario DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.9876543

License Type

MIT

Version Tag

v1.0

Location/Repository

https://github.com/NexusUser/indus-fallback-tier2

Description

Python fallback model for rainfall prediction if radar feed is lost.

Date Created

2025-06-15

Last Updated

2025-06-16

Forked From

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1234567

Associated Clause ID(s)

C-2

Notes/Comments

Stress tested for IndusFlood2025 scenario.

4. Good Practice Guidelines

  • Log Each Asset Immediately: Record each module or fork when it is first drafted or integrated.

  • Link Properly: Include valid DOIs for source scenarios and clear repository URLs.

  • Synchronize Versions: Ensure that module version tags align with your main scenario version on Zenodo.

  • Cite Forks Transparently: If reusing or adapting another Fellow’s module, always cite the original source DOI or repository link and comply with the open license.

  • Attach When Needed: For major scenario releases, include an up-to-date export of this log as a supplementary file in Zenodo.

5. Governance Note

Maintaining a clear Knowledge Commons Contribution Log is an explicit governance requirement under the Nexus Sovereignty Framework. Missing, incomplete, or inaccurate logs can compromise clause passport trust and corridor replay validity.

6. Example Placeholder URLs

When preparing your actual log, replace these examples with your real DOIs and repositories. For training or templates, use realistic placeholders like:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.0000000

  • GitHub Repo: https://github.com/YourUsername/your-scenario-module

PreviousV. EngagementNextMEDIA

Last updated

Was this helpful?