Engineering Compiler

Lexical Analysis converts loaded BDL character streams into classified tokens according to the applicable BDL lexical specification.

The process shall identify:

keywords;

identifiers;

qualified names;

literals;

numerical values;

units and quantities;

coordinates;

version expressions;

operators;

delimiters;

annotations;

comments;

incomplete or unknown-value markers.

Lexical rules shall be selected from the declared and resolved BDL language version. The compiler shall not interpret tokens according to a different version merely to make invalid source appear acceptable.

The analysis shall detect invalid characters, unsupported encodings, ambiguous Unicode forms, visually deceptive identifiers, prohibited control characters, malformed numbers, invalid unit expressions, and unterminated constructs.

Original numerical precision shall be preserved. Lexical Analysis shall not prematurely convert quantities, coordinates, dates, version numbers, identifiers, and ordinary numbers into an undifferentiated numerical form.

Comments and documentation may be retained for authoring and traceability but shall not alter engineering meaning unless expressed through a formally governed annotation construct.

Each token shall retain its precise source location and source identity so that later diagnostics can be traced to the originating declaration.

Controlled recovery may permit continued analysis after a lexical error. Recovered regions shall remain marked and shall not support safety-significant output where their intended tokenization is ambiguous.

Lexical success establishes only that the source can be divided into valid language elements. It does not establish syntactic, semantic, engineering, or regulatory validity.

100. Syntax Analysis

Syntax Analysis determines whether the token stream conforms to the formal grammar of the resolved BDL version and constructs the corresponding Abstract Syntax Tree.

It shall recognize documents, packages, modules, declarations, values, expressions, relationships, constraints, profiles, states, imports, annotations, and authorized extensions.

The compiler shall detect:

missing or unexpected tokens;

incomplete declarations;

prohibited nesting;

invalid expression structure;

duplicate syntax-level constructs;

unsupported grammar features;

ambiguous source forms;

invalid extension placement;

Syntax Analysis may use controlled error recovery to identify multiple errors in a single execution. The compiler shall distinguish source that was parsed normally from source whose structure was reconstructed or inferred during recovery.

Where more than one interpretation remains possible, the compiler shall require source clarification. It shall not select an interpretation based solely on probable author intent for an approval-stage or execution-stage compilation.

Serialization-specific differences shall be normalized only where they have no effect on formal BDL meaning.

Successful Syntax Analysis confirms that a structured language representation can be produced. It does not establish that identifiers exist, references are valid, units are compatible, configurations are complete, interfaces are compatible, or engineering requirements have been satisfied.

The process shall evaluate:

module identities;

package membership;

declared imports;

exported definitions;

private definitions;

module versions;

compatibility ranges;

aliases;

conditional imports;

dependency paths;

integrity and trust status.

Every module reference shall resolve to a specific identity and version. The compiler shall not silently substitute a newer, older, similarly named, or locally available module when the declared requirement cannot be satisfied.

Module Resolution shall construct an import graph and detect missing modules, duplicate identities, conflicting versions, prohibited dependencies, unauthorized sources, and circular imports.

Permitted cycles shall require a defined semantic model and deterministic resolution behavior. Otherwise, circular module dependencies shall be rejected.

Private module content shall remain inaccessible outside its governed scope. Exporting a name shall not transfer authority, certification, or ownership beyond what the module declaration permits.

Where multiple versions are technically compatible, the selection policy shall be explicit and reproducible. Safety-significant compilations should use exact resolved versions and immutable integrity references.

The resolved module graph shall become part of the Compilation Context and dependency lock record.

Module Resolution establishes availability and binding of source modules. It does not establish that the engineering definitions contained within them are applicable, compatible, certified, or sufficient for the target.

102. Namespace Resolution

Namespace Resolution determines the exact scope and identity associated with every named definition and reference.

It shall process:

global System05 namespaces;

package namespaces;

module namespaces;

registry namespaces;

manufacturer namespaces;

project namespaces;

building-instance namespaces;

imported aliases;

local scopes;

extension namespaces;

version-qualified names.

Every reusable engineering definition shall be resolved through its declared namespace rather than through display-name similarity.

The compiler shall detect ambiguous names, duplicate declarations, unauthorized shadowing, invalid aliases, prohibited namespace occupation, unresolved qualifications, and attempts to redefine reserved System05 terms.

Resolution shall be deterministic and independent of source-loading or file-processing order.

An alias may simplify source expression but shall not change the stable identity, authority, version, or provenance of the referenced entity.

Local project declarations may specialize or instantiate external definitions where permitted, but they shall not silently replace the meaning of certified, constitutional, regulatory, or manufacturer-controlled definitions.

Where two imported modules expose the same unqualified name, the compiler shall require explicit qualification unless a governed precedence rule produces a unique and traceable result.

Namespace Resolution shall preserve the complete resolved name path for every declaration and reference.

Successful resolution establishes which named object is intended. It does not establish type correctness, physical identity, compatibility, applicability, or approval.

103. Schema Resolution

Schema Resolution determines the formal structural and semantic schemas applicable to every document, module, entity, evidence object, registry object, and output definition.

The process shall resolve:

schema identity;

schema version;

language compatibility;

namespace;

required and optional fields;

type definitions;

cardinality rules;

extension points;

inheritance;

migration requirements;

deprecation status;

validation behavior.

A schema reference shall resolve to an exact supported version. The compiler shall not assume that two schemas are compatible because their names or version numbers appear similar.

Multiple schemas may apply to one compilation subject, but their ownership boundaries and interaction rules shall be explicit.

The compiler shall detect missing schemas, conflicting schema declarations, unsupported versions, illegal extensions, invalid inheritance, ambiguous field ownership, and schema dependencies that cannot be resolved.

Manufacturer and project extensions shall use governed extension mechanisms. They shall not redefine mandatory System05 properties or weaken base-schema requirements.

Where source content uses an older supported schema, migration may occur only through an authorized and traceable transformation. Any loss, reinterpretation, or unresolved mapping shall be reported.

Schema validity establishes that information has the required formal structure. It does not prove that declared values are true, evidence is sufficient, geometry is feasible, or the configuration is compliant.

Type Checking verifies that every value, property, entity, expression, relationship, and operation conforms to the System05 Type System and applicable domain schemas.

The compiler shall evaluate:

declared and inferred types;

type identity;

instance and definition distinctions;

inheritance;

composition;

parameterized types;

constrained subtypes;

optional values;

alternatives;

unknown values;

permitted conversions;

domain-specific operations.

Nominal engineering types shall not be treated as interchangeable merely because they share similar fields or geometry.

The compiler shall detect invalid assignments, incompatible operands, prohibited conversions, incorrect relationship endpoints, misuse of lifecycle states, invalid evidence types, and substitution of unverified information for authoritative information.

Type conversions shall be explicit where precision, authority, scope, uncertainty, or engineering meaning could be lost.

A component type, certified product family, manufactured instance, installed instance, and Digital Twin representation shall remain distinct even when they refer to related objects.

Unknown, unavailable, conflicting, and not-applicable values shall retain formal type meaning. They shall not be collapsed into a general null value or treated as compliant values.

Type checking may infer a type only where the language and schema establish a deterministic result. Probabilistic or AI-assisted classification shall remain proposed until confirmed where type identity is safety-significant.

Successful Type Checking establishes formal semantic compatibility. It does not establish dimensional, spatial, structural, interface, or regulatory validity.

105. Unit Validation

Unit Validation verifies the dimensional meaning, unit expression, precision, range, and conversion behavior of every engineering quantity.

The compiler shall check:

declared units;

physical dimensions;

authorized unit systems;

compound units;

dimensional compatibility;

conversion factors;

temperature offsets;

angle conventions;

coordinate units;

tolerances;

uncertainty;

significant figures;

permissible rounding.

A quantity without a required unit shall not be silently interpreted through organizational custom or local convention unless an authorized profile supplies that default and records its application.

The compiler shall distinguish nominal values, measured values, characteristic values, design values, allowable values, target values, and limits.

Dimensionless values shall retain their declared meaning. A ratio, percentage, probability, coefficient, strain, and angular measure shall not become interchangeable solely because each can be represented numerically.

Conversions shall preserve sufficient precision for the intended Compilation Target. Precision loss, scale anomalies, suspicious magnitude changes, incompatible units, and invalid arithmetic shall produce diagnostics.

Tolerance and uncertainty shall remain linked to their quantities and shall be converted consistently.

Unit Validation shall occur before engineering comparisons and calculations that depend upon dimensional meaning.

A dimensionally valid expression may still be physically unreasonable or noncompliant. The compiler shall therefore distinguish successful Unit Validation from engineering acceptance.

Identity Validation confirms that every significant physical, digital, logical, regulatory, evidentiary, and configuration object possesses a valid and appropriately scoped identity.

The process shall evaluate:

identity format;

issuing authority;

namespace;

uniqueness;

version relationship;

object type;

lifecycle status;

aliases;

serial identity;

registry status;

revocation or supersession;

physical-to-digital binding.

The compiler shall distinguish the identities of:

reusable definitions;

component families;

certified products;

manufactured items;

installed items;

replacement candidates;

System05 Nodes;

cartridges;

interfaces;

assemblies;

buildings;

configurations;

evidence objects;

compilation outputs.

Duplicate identities, identity reuse, conflicting issuers, invalid aliases, missing instance identities, and references to revoked identities shall produce diagnostics.

Barcode, QR, RFID, embedded electronic identity, manufacturer serial number, and visual recognition may contribute to identity validation. None shall be assumed to represent the correct physical object without the verification required by the target and lifecycle stage.

Proposed identity reconciliation for legacy objects may be AI-assisted, but safety-significant binding shall require governed confirmation.

Identity Validation establishes that an object can be reliably distinguished and traced. It does not establish that the object is authentic, undamaged, compatible, certified for the intended use, or physically installed at the declared location.

107. Reference Resolution

Reference Resolution binds every semantic reference to its intended engineering object, property, relationship, source, rule, evidence item, or configuration entity.

References may be:

direct;

qualified;

relative;

registry-based;

identity-based;

version-constrained;

configuration-dependent;

lifecycle-dependent;

spatial;

The compiler shall detect broken references, ambiguous targets, references outside permitted scope, invalid version bindings, references to inactive alternatives, prohibited circular references, and references whose targets have been revoked or superseded.

Textual names, graphical proximity, matching geometry, or similar descriptions shall not be sufficient for safety-significant binding.

References to a type shall remain distinguishable from references to a physical instance. References to a proposed configuration shall not be interpreted as references to the active BIOS configuration.

Where a reference is valid only under a particular profile, lifecycle state, or configuration alternative, that condition shall be preserved.

Resolution shall not silently redirect a missing reference to an apparently equivalent object.

Every resolved reference shall preserve source location, resolution path, target identity, target version, and applicable configuration.

Successful Reference Resolution establishes the intended relational binding. It does not establish that the referenced object is suitable, compatible, sufficiently evidenced, or approved for the requested use.

108. Coordinate-System Resolution

Coordinate-System Resolution determines the coordinate context of every spatial, geometric, manufacturing, survey, sensor, and robotic object.

The process shall identify:

coordinate-system identity;

origin;

axis orientation;

handedness;

datum;

unit system;

scale;

dimensionality;

orientation conventions;

transformation relationships;

accuracy and uncertainty;

validity range;

validity period.

Every geometry-bearing entity shall be assigned to an explicit coordinate system or to a governed local system connected to the wider coordinate hierarchy.

The compiler shall resolve transformations among geographic, site, building, floor, assembly, component, node, cartridge, manufacturing, robot, tool, survey, and sensor frames.

It shall detect missing transformations, ambiguous transformation paths, inconsistent loops, reversed axes, unit mismatches, unsupported scaling, outdated survey frames, and precision insufficient for the intended target.

Where several transformation paths exist, discrepancies shall be evaluated according to source authority, measurement quality, and target precision.

Approximate transformations may support visualization and conceptual planning but shall not support precision fabrication or robotic execution unless their verified accuracy satisfies target requirements.

Time-dependent frames shall be represented where movement, deformation, settlement, thermal behavior, or active machinery affects spatial meaning.

Coordinate-System Resolution shall produce a traceable transformation graph. It shall not modify original measured or declared coordinates without preserving the source values and transformation history.

109. Spatial Resolution

Spatial Resolution establishes the resolved locations, containment, adjacency, accessibility, separation, clearance, reachability, and spatial occupation of engineering entities.

The compiler shall process:

sites and buildings;

floors and zones;

rooms and service spaces;

structural bays;

installation zones;

maintenance spaces;

inspection zones;

clearance envelopes;

transportation paths;

replacement paths;

robotic workspaces;

emergency-access routes;

temporary construction areas.

Spatial relationships shall be derived from authoritative geometry, declared relationships, coordinate systems, and applicable profiles.

The compiler shall distinguish exact, bounded, approximate, proposed, observed, and unknown spatial information.

It shall detect contradictory containment, unintended overlap, inadequate access, blocked installation paths, insufficient service clearances, inaccessible inspection points, and spatial relationships inconsistent with declared geometry.

Adjacency alone shall not establish access, connectivity, fire separation, or dimensional compliance.

Temporary and lifecycle-specific spatial states shall be evaluated where construction, lifting, equipment movement, maintenance, replacement, emergency operation, or disassembly changes the usable space.

Spatial Resolution may produce a Spatial Graph and target-specific spatial indexes.

Where geometry is incomplete, the compiler may establish partial spatial relationships but shall not claim precise clearance or access compliance.

Successful Spatial Resolution establishes coherent location relationships. It does not independently establish structural capacity, interface compatibility, regulatory compliance, or execution readiness.

110. Geometry Resolution

Geometry Resolution produces a coherent, normalized, and target-appropriate geometric representation of the compilation subject.

It shall process:

points;

lines;

curves;

surfaces;

solids;

meshes;

profiles;

parametric geometry;

reference planes;

envelopes;

openings;

connection features;

manufacturing features;

tolerance zones;

collision volumes.

The compiler shall distinguish design geometry, nominal geometry, manufacturing geometry, measured geometry, as-built geometry, analytical geometry, clearance geometry, and simplified visualization geometry.

Geometry Resolution shall evaluate coordinate consistency, dimensional completeness, closure, orientation, intersections, self-intersections, degeneracy, invalid topology, precision, and applicable tolerances.

Parametric geometry shall be resolved using identified parameter values and constraint conditions. Unresolved parameters shall remain visible and shall restrict downstream targets requiring exact geometry.

Where multiple sources describe the same object, the compiler shall apply authority and precedence rules rather than merging inconsistent geometry silently.

Simplification, meshing, discretization, or format conversion shall declare permitted deviation and information loss.

Manufacturing and robotic outputs shall require geometric resolution and precision appropriate to the relevant process, tool, alignment method, and tolerance class.

A geometrically valid object may still be impossible to manufacture, assemble, inspect, or certify. Geometry Resolution shall therefore remain distinct from readiness evaluation.

Every derived geometric artifact shall retain traceability to its source geometry, transformations, parameters, and processing methods.

111. Relationship Resolution

Relationship Resolution determines the formal engineering meaning of connections among entities after identities, references, types, coordinates, and geometry have been resolved.

Relationships may express:

containment;

composition;

connection;

support;

restraint;

dependency;

adjacency;

alignment;

mating;

capability provision;

requirement satisfaction;

evidence support;

certification;

observation;

ownership;

replacement;

derivation;

lifecycle succession.

Every relationship shall identify its endpoints, type, direction, cardinality, authority, configuration scope, lifecycle state, and provenance.

The compiler shall detect missing endpoints, invalid endpoint types, contradictory relationships, prohibited multiplicity, duplicate connections, impossible directionality, and relationships inconsistent with physical geometry or configuration state.

Declared relationships shall remain distinguishable from inferred and observed relationships.

A visually contacting pair of objects shall not automatically be treated as structurally connected. Likewise, a declared connection shall not be considered physically installed without the required evidence.

Relationship inference may be used where permitted, but inferred safety-significant relationships shall require confirmation before supporting execution or approval.

Adapters, intermediary components, and cartridges shall appear explicitly rather than being collapsed into direct relationships between their surrounding entities.

Resolved relationships shall populate the relevant Engineering Entity, Spatial, Structural, Interface, Capability, Dependency, Utility, Lifecycle, Evidence, and Rule Evaluation Graphs.

112. Profile Application

Profile Application applies the resolved provisions of all applicable Engineering, Regional, Regulatory, Project, Manufacturer, Interface, Robotic, Manufacturing, and lifecycle profiles to the canonical configuration.

The compiler shall identify for every applied provision:

profile identity and version;

authority;

scope;

affected entities;

lifecycle applicability;

mandatory or advisory status;

default values;

constraints;

required evidence;

permitted overrides;

dependencies and exclusions.

Profiles may add requirements, specialize generic rules, select approved alternatives, define tolerances, supply defaults, or impose target-specific restrictions.

A lower-authority profile shall not weaken a higher-authority mandatory requirement without a formally authorized variance.

Where profiles conflict, the compiler shall preserve the conflict, apply established precedence rules where possible, and identify any required decision authority.

Defaults applied through profiles shall remain visible and distinguishable from explicitly declared source values.

Engineering Profiles generated or adapted by AI shall remain proposed until validated and authorized according to their intended scope.

Profile Application shall produce an Effective Profile representing the combined provisions applicable to the compilation. The Effective Profile shall not erase the identity and provenance of its contributing profiles.

A profile’s successful application does not establish that the configuration satisfies its provisions. It determines which provisions must be evaluated during subsequent requirement and constraint stages.

113. Requirement Resolution

Requirement Resolution identifies, normalizes, reconciles, and binds every requirement applicable to the compilation subject and target.

Requirements may originate from:

System05 constitutional rules;

BDL schemas;

regulatory authorities;

certification programs;

Engineering Profiles;

project specifications;

owners;

designers;

manufacturers;

interface definitions;

operational systems;

lifecycle policies;

Compilation Targets.

Every resolved requirement shall identify:

requirement identity and version;

source and authority;

subject and scope;

lifecycle stage;

triggering conditions;

required performance or condition;

validation method;

required evidence;

severity;

permitted exceptions;

dependent requirements.

The compiler shall distinguish mandatory requirements, conditional requirements, recommendations, preferences, defaults, and optimization objectives.

Equivalent requirements from multiple sources may be linked but shall not lose their independent authority or evidence obligations.

Conflicting requirements shall be evaluated through precedence rules. Where no authorized resolution exists, the compiler shall preserve the conflict and block affected target readiness.

Requirements expressed qualitatively shall be converted into executable rules only where an authorized interpretation exists. The compiler shall not invent numerical limits merely to enable automated evaluation.

Every applicable requirement shall be linked to the entities, constraints, rules, evidence, and outputs it affects.

An unresolved requirement shall not be treated as satisfied. Requirement Resolution establishes the effective obligations; subsequent stages determine whether those obligations have been met.

114. Constraint Evaluation

Constraint Evaluation determines whether the resolved configuration satisfies applicable numerical, geometric, spatial, relational, logical, temporal, lifecycle, and domain-specific constraints.

Each evaluation shall identify:

constraint identity;

source and authority;

evaluated entities;

input values;

applicable limits;

tolerance and uncertainty;

evaluation method;

result;

severity;

assumptions;

evidence;

permitted corrective action.

Hard constraints shall block affected outputs when violated unless a governed exception or variance has been authorized.

Soft constraints may generate warnings, rankings, or optimization objectives but shall not be represented as mandatory failures.

Conditional constraints shall be evaluated only when their declared triggering conditions are satisfied. The applicability determination shall remain traceable.

Missing or uncertain information shall produce an indeterminate result where satisfaction cannot be established.

The compiler shall not alter constraints to make a preferred configuration appear valid. Optimization may search for configurations satisfying the constraints but shall remain separate from compliance determination.

Where constraints conflict, their authority, scope, and consequences shall be exposed. Execution order shall not determine which constraint governs.

Constraint propagation may identify secondary effects across connected entities and engineering domains.

Constraint Evaluation shall preserve both successful and unsuccessful results so that reviewers can determine what was evaluated and why.

A passing constraint result is limited to the declared configuration, inputs, method, tolerance, and lifecycle conditions under which it was obtained.

115. Topology Construction

Topology Construction creates the engineering graphs required to understand how entities are connected, supported, dependent, supplied, evidenced, and governed.

The compiler shall construct, as applicable:

Engineering Entity Graph;

Spatial Graph;

Structural Topology Graph;

Interface Connection Graph;

Capability Graph;

Dependency Graph;

Utility Network Graph;

Lifecycle State Graph;

Evidence Graph;

Rule Evaluation Graph.

Topology shall be derived from resolved identities, references, geometry, relationships, profiles, requirements, and configuration state.

The compiler shall distinguish potential, selected, proposed, installed, commissioned, active, degraded, and historical connections.

It shall identify disconnected entities, orphan interfaces, unsupported elements, prohibited cycles, multiple conflicting assignments, missing paths, invalid containment, and graph relationships inconsistent with source declarations or geometry.

Topology Construction shall include intermediate configurations where transportation, lifting, assembly, maintenance, repair, replacement, or disassembly changes the relationship graph.

Graph construction shall not itself assert capacity, compatibility, or compliance. It establishes the relational structure upon which those evaluations operate.

Every graph element shall preserve identity, type, source, applicable configuration, lifecycle context, and provenance.

Incremental compilation may update only affected graph regions when dependency analysis proves that the remaining topology remains valid.

The resulting graphs shall remain synchronized with the Canonical Engineering Representation and shall not become independent sources of engineering truth.

116. Load-Path Evaluation

Load-Path Evaluation determines whether structural actions can be transferred safely and continuously through the resolved configuration for every applicable loading and lifecycle condition.

For System05 structural connections, evaluation shall recognize the fundamental path:

Member → Cartridge → Node → Cartridge → Member

The compiler shall evaluate:

gravity load paths;

lateral load paths;

uplift and overturning;

diaphragm transfer;

bracing and stability;

foundation transfer;

local connection forces;

alternative and redundant paths;

temporary construction paths;

lifting and transportation states;

damaged and degraded conditions;

repair and replacement states.

The evaluation shall detect discontinuities, unsupported members, missing restraints, unintended mechanisms, incompatible releases, overloaded interfaces, unverified transfer assumptions, and dependencies upon inactive or absent components.

Topology alone shall not establish adequacy. Load-path evaluation shall use applicable geometry, materials, capacities, stiffness, connection behavior, tolerances, boundary conditions, load combinations, calculation methods, and evidence.

The intended hierarchy of failure shall be evaluated where defined. Replaceable cartridges or other controlled sacrificial components should reach their governed failure or energy-dissipation condition before protected nodes or primary members where the applicable System05 design establishes that hierarchy.

Every evaluation shall identify its load cases, assumptions, methods, uncertainties, and required professional or regulatory approval.

A successful automated evaluation shall not replace required structural engineering analysis or approval. It establishes only the compiler-determined status within the declared method and Compilation Context.

117. Interface Compatibility Evaluation

Interface Compatibility Evaluation determines whether two or more connected entities can interact safely, correctly, and consistently throughout their intended lifecycle.

The compiler shall evaluate compatibility across applicable dimensions, including:

interface identity and version;

mating roles;

geometry;

alignment;

tolerance;

locking;

structural capacity;

stiffness and movement;

material interaction;

fire and thermal behavior;

moisture and environmental exposure;

electrical behavior;

fluid behavior;

data communication;

safety functions;

inspection;

maintenance;

replacement;

manufacturing;

robotic handling;

The compiler shall compare the complete set of interface requirements and offered properties. It shall identify missing capabilities, incompatible limits, unsupported versions, certification gaps, and conditions requiring an adapter.

Adapters shall be evaluated as explicit engineering entities. Their effects on tolerances, capacity, load paths, access, inspection, failure hierarchy, data continuity, and lifecycle serviceability shall remain visible.

Compatibility outcomes may include:

compatible;

conditionally compatible;

incompatible;

indeterminate;

deprecated;

compatible through an approved adapter.

A compatible result shall identify the exact entities, interface versions, conditions, evidence, and configuration for which it applies. Compatibility shall be reevaluated when any of those dependencies changes.

118. Capability Matching

Capability Matching determines whether the offered capabilities of selected entities satisfy the requirements of their connected entities, systems, targets, and lifecycle roles.

Capabilities may concern:

structural resistance;

stiffness;

movement;

alignment;

capture and locking;

power;

communication;

fluid transfer;

sensing;

environmental protection;

fire performance;

robotic grasping;

positioning;

inspection;

maintenance;

replacement;

disassembly;

reuse.

Every capability shall identify its provider, consumer, version, limits, conditions, evidence, certification, availability state, and applicable configuration.

The compiler shall evaluate mandatory, conditional, and optional capabilities separately. Satisfaction of optional features shall not compensate for a missing mandatory capability.

A nominally offered capability shall not be treated as available when it is disabled, degraded, uncertified, outside its environmental range, incompatible with the current interface version, or unavailable in the relevant lifecycle state.

Capability negotiation may select among compatible alternatives but shall not weaken the consumer’s mandatory requirements.

Derived capabilities shall remain traceable to the properties, calculations, tests, and assumptions that establish them.

Where several entities collectively provide a capability, their dependency and coordination conditions shall be represented explicitly.

Capability Matching outcomes shall identify satisfied requirements, unsatisfied requirements, conditional matches, excess capability, unavailable capability, and unresolved information.

Successful matching establishes functional sufficiency within the declared conditions. It does not independently establish total interface compatibility, engineering safety, or regulatory acceptance.

119. Dependency Resolution

Dependency Resolution determines the complete set and ordering of source, engineering, evidence, certification, configuration, lifecycle, and output dependencies required by the Compilation Target.

The compiler shall resolve dependencies among:

packages and modules;

schemas and types;

profiles and rules;

entities and configurations;

calculations and assumptions;

geometry and coordinates;

interfaces and capabilities;

evidence and claims;

certifications and product versions;

manufacturing processes and resources;

assembly operations;

commissioning activities;

BIOS deployment packages;

generated outputs.

Each dependency shall identify its direction, type, version condition, criticality, lifecycle scope, and status.

The compiler shall detect unavailable dependencies, incompatible versions, unverified sources, prohibited cycles, expired certifications, unresolved upstream decisions, and dependencies upon inactive configuration alternatives.

Cycles shall be accepted only where a controlled iterative or state-based resolution method exists. Nonconvergent or undefined cycles shall fail.

Resolved dependencies shall determine compilation order, cache validity, change impact, and release eligibility.

A change to an upstream dependency shall invalidate or require review of every affected downstream result. Unaffected results may be retained only when the Dependency Graph demonstrates continued validity.

Dependency Resolution shall produce a reproducible lock record for formal compilation.

The absence of a declared dependency shall not be taken as proof of independence when an engineering module has failed to declare information essential to its conclusions.

120. Utility Network Evaluation

Utility Network Evaluation determines whether each building service network is complete, compatible, adequately sized, protectable, controllable, accessible, and suitable for its intended states.

Networks may include:

electrical power;

communication and data;

water supply;

drainage;

gas;

heating and cooling fluids;

ventilation;

fire suppression;

sensor networks;

control networks;

specialized building services.

The compiler shall evaluate network continuity, direction, capacity, branching, pressure or voltage conditions, isolation, protection, redundancy, routing, interfaces, control dependencies, inspection access, maintenance access, and commissioning requirements.

Each utility domain shall retain its own physical and engineering semantics. A generic graph connection shall not substitute for domain-specific evaluation.

The compiler shall detect disconnected consumers, overloaded branches, incompatible media, invalid direction, missing isolation, insufficient protection, conflicting control dependencies, and inaccessible service components.

Cross-domain hazards shall be evaluated, including water near electrical systems, heat near data or sensor systems, penetrations through fire boundaries, utility routing through structural connections, and interference with cartridge replacement or robotic access.

Construction, emergency, maintenance, degraded, and shutdown states shall be evaluated where they differ materially from normal operation.

A topologically complete utility network may still fail capacity, code, safety, access, or commissioning requirements.

Every result shall identify the network configuration, calculation or rule method, assumptions, unresolved data, and required evidence.

121. Lifecycle-State Evaluation

Lifecycle-State Evaluation determines whether every entity, interface, configuration, evidence item, and system occupies a valid state and whether proposed transitions are permitted.

The compiler shall evaluate:

current physical state;

digital-record state;

approval state;

operational state;

proposed next state;

triggering event;

transition guards;

required inspections;

required evidence;

responsible authority;

permitted actions;

resulting restrictions.

The process shall detect invalid transitions, skipped inspections, unauthorized replacement, activation before commissioning, use of expired evidence, installation of incompatible components, and disagreement between the active BIOS configuration and observed physical state.

A physically installed object shall not automatically be considered commissioned, approved, or active.

Lifecycle evaluation shall support manufacturing, inspection, delivery, installation, commissioning, operation, degradation, maintenance, repair, replacement, removal, reuse, and decommissioning.

Temporary and intermediate states shall be evaluated where they introduce different load paths, utility conditions, access requirements, or safety risks.

State history shall remain auditable. Reversion to a previous state shall be represented as a new governed transition rather than erasing intervening events.

When actual state cannot be confirmed, the compiler shall classify the result as uncertain or indeterminate and impose the restrictions required by the applicable profile.

Lifecycle-State Evaluation establishes state validity within the model. Real-world transition authorization and execution remain subject to the responsible human, BIOS, control, inspection, and regulatory authorities.

122. Evidence Sufficiency Evaluation

Evidence Sufficiency Evaluation determines whether each engineering, manufacturing, compatibility, safety, regulatory, commissioning, and lifecycle claim is supported by evidence of adequate scope, quality, integrity, and authority.

The compiler shall evaluate:

evidence identity;

source;

integrity;

method;

subject;

configuration;

version;

batch or serial applicability;

environmental conditions;

uncertainty;

independence;

validity period;

certification status;

lifecycle applicability;

consequence of failure.

Evidence may include calculations, tests, inspections, certifications, measurements, survey records, sensor records, manufacturing quality records, professional approvals, and regulatory determinations.

The presence of evidence shall not be confused with sufficiency. Evidence for one product version, orientation, connection, environment, manufacturing batch, or lifecycle state shall not automatically support another.

The compiler shall identify missing, expired, revoked, altered, contradictory, indirect, or out-of-scope evidence.

A large volume of low-quality evidence shall not automatically satisfy a requirement for independent testing, certification, inspection, or professional approval.

AI-generated assessments, statistical predictions, and visual similarity may support investigation but shall not replace required direct evidence.

Results may include:

sufficient;

conditionally sufficient;

insufficient;

contradicted;

expired;

revoked;

not evaluated.

Every sufficiency decision shall remain linked to the supported claim, applicable rule, consequence level, and affected output gate.

123. Safety Rule Evaluation

Safety Rule Evaluation determines whether the resolved configuration satisfies all applicable safety-significant constitutional, engineering, operational, manufacturing, assembly, robotic, fire, structural, utility, and lifecycle rules.

The compiler shall identify:

applicable safety-rule identities and versions;

affected entities and states;

required inputs;

evaluation methods;

safety limits;

evidence requirements;

result severity;

required corrective actions;

permitted exceptions;

approving authority.

Safety rules shall be evaluated across final and intermediate states, including manufacturing, transportation, lifting, assembly, commissioning, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement, and disassembly.

Missing information required to establish safety shall not produce a passing result.

The compiler shall detect single-point failures, unsafe state transitions, unprotected hazards, inaccessible emergency functions, invalid failure hierarchies, incompatible safety systems, and reliance upon unavailable protective capabilities.

A lower-authority project, manufacturer, optimization, or AI-generated rule shall not weaken a higher-authority safety requirement.

Authorized variances shall remain explicit and shall identify scope, justification, compensating measures, evidence, approval, expiration, and affected outputs.

Safety-rule outcomes may be pass, conditional pass, fail, indeterminate, blocked, or not applicable.

A compiler pass does not remove the need for required professional judgment, inspection, testing, or regulatory approval.

No manufacturing, robotic, BIOS activation, or field-execution output shall proceed when an applicable critical safety rule has failed or remains indeterminate without authorized control measures.

124. Regulatory Rule Evaluation

Regulatory Rule Evaluation determines whether the compilation subject satisfies the legally applicable codes, regulations, adopted standards, permits, directives, and authority decisions.

The compiler shall resolve:

jurisdiction;

applicable authority;

adopted code editions;

amendments;

building and occupancy classification;

project location;

lifecycle stage;

permit conditions;

effective dates;

transition provisions;

approved alternatives;

professional approval requirements.

Regulatory applicability shall be determined explicitly. The existence of a newer standard shall not mean that it has been adopted by the governing jurisdiction.

The compiler shall distinguish mandatory legal requirements from referenced standards, guidance, recommendations, organizational policies, and System05 requirements.

Where several jurisdictions or authorities apply, their combined obligations and conflicts shall be preserved.

The compiler may automate regulatory checking only where the relevant rule has been represented through an authorized and verified interpretation. Ambiguous legal or regulatory language shall be referred to the designated authority rather than silently converted into an executable assumption.

Approved variances, alternative methods, and authority interpretations shall identify their scope, conditions, expiration, and affected configuration.

A regulatory database or rule package shall be versioned, integrity-verified, and linked to the compilation record.

Regulatory Evaluation supports compliance determination but does not itself issue permits, professional seals, certificates, or authority approvals.

Unresolved regulatory applicability or failed mandatory rules shall block outputs requiring regulatory acceptance.

125. Manufacturing Readiness Evaluation

Manufacturing Readiness Evaluation determines whether the resolved design contains sufficient, valid, and authorized information for controlled production.

The compiler shall evaluate:

final component identity and revision;

manufacturing geometry;

materials and grades;

dimensions and tolerances;

surface and coating requirements;

process requirements;

tooling and machine capabilities;

inspection criteria;

quality-control requirements;

traceability;

serialization;

approved substitutions;

packaging and handling requirements;

required certifications;

production evidence.

Manufacturing geometry shall be consistent with the canonical engineering model and shall provide the precision required by the selected process.

The compiler shall detect unresolved dimensions, open alternatives, incompatible tolerances, unavailable materials, unsupported processes, inaccessible inspection features, missing acceptance criteria, and changes not incorporated into the released revision.

A manufacturable component shall also remain compatible with its interfaces, assembly sequence, safety requirements, lifecycle replacement strategy, and certification scope.

Manufacturer-specific process preparation may add production information but shall not alter authoritative engineering intent without an approved change process.

Readiness outcomes may distinguish prototype, research, preliminary production, controlled production, and certified production.

A successful readiness evaluation authorizes neither procurement nor production by itself. Release shall require the designated approvals and output controls.

Every manufacturing package shall identify the exact configuration, source revision, compiler context, tolerances, process assumptions, and required inspection evidence upon which its readiness status depends.

126. Assembly Readiness Evaluation

Assembly Readiness Evaluation determines whether the resolved components, tools, procedures, access conditions, sequencing, and evidence are sufficient for safe and correct assembly.

The compiler shall evaluate:

component availability and identity;

interface compatibility;

assembly sequence;

alignment and capture features;

locking procedures;

required tools;

temporary supports;

lifting requirements;

worker access;

inspection hold points;

tolerances;

environmental limits;

safety controls;

error-proofing;

recovery procedures;

The compiler shall detect impossible sequences, blocked access, insufficient clearances, unstable intermediate states, unavailable tools, incompatible connection states, accumulated tolerance conflicts, inaccessible locks, and missing verification steps.

For System05 assemblies, cartridges, nodes, members, and adapters shall retain explicit identities and assembly roles. The process shall verify that each required connection can be aligned, captured, locked, inspected, and—where intended—later released or replaced.

Temporary configurations shall be evaluated independently where their load paths, restraints, utility conditions, or safety requirements differ from the completed building.

Assembly instructions shall identify initial conditions, required intermediate states, allowable deviations, stop conditions, and final acceptance evidence.

A design may be structurally valid in its completed state yet fail Assembly Readiness because it cannot be safely or practically constructed.

Successful evaluation establishes readiness within the declared site, tools, sequence, personnel capability, and environmental conditions. It does not itself authorize field work.

127. Robotic Readiness Evaluation

Robotic Readiness Evaluation determines whether a configuration and its execution package can be safely, accurately, and reliably performed by the designated robotic system.

The compiler shall evaluate:

robot identity and capability profile;

supported task and command versions;

coordinate-frame alignment;

localization accuracy;

reachability;

payload;

grasp and tool compatibility;

collision-free paths;

visibility and sensing;

alignment features;

tolerance stack;

force and torque limits;

work-cell boundaries;

human exclusion or collaboration controls;

stop and recovery behavior;

verification procedures.

Robot readiness shall be evaluated against the actual robot, tool, firmware, controller, environment, and task-package versions.

Nominal reach or payload shall not establish task feasibility. The full motion path, orientation, dynamic condition, tool geometry, component behavior, and intermediate assembly state shall be considered.

The compiler shall detect unreachable targets, singularities, collisions, insufficient clearance, unverified coordinate transforms, unsupported commands, inadequate sensing, unsafe human interaction, and states from which recovery is not defined.

System05 nodes, cartridges, members, and interfaces intended for robotic handling should expose governed grasping, alignment, capture, locking, identification, and inspection capabilities.

Robotic execution packages shall define verified initial conditions and safe stop states. A mismatch between the compiled and observed work-cell state shall require reevaluation.

Simulation may support readiness but shall not replace required physical calibration, commissioning, safety validation, or task-specific verification.

128. Commissioning Readiness Evaluation

Commissioning Readiness Evaluation determines whether the installed configuration is sufficiently complete, identified, inspected, configured, and evidenced to begin formal commissioning.

The compiler shall evaluate:

installed component identities;

as-built configuration;

interface and locking status;

inspection completion;

utility continuity;

sensor and actuator availability;

control configuration;

calibration status;

safety-system readiness;

test procedures;

acceptance criteria;

responsible authorities;

required documentation;

unresolved defects;

temporary restrictions.

Design intent, released construction information, observed physical state, and proposed active BIOS configuration shall be compared.

The compiler shall detect missing inspections, unresolved substitutions, unverified connections, incomplete utilities, uncalibrated sensors, unavailable safety functions, incorrect firmware or protocol versions, and discrepancies between digital and physical records.

Commissioning sequences shall identify prerequisite states, isolation requirements, test order, expected responses, failure criteria, rollback actions, and required evidence.

Partial commissioning may be permitted for isolated systems or zones where boundaries and restrictions are explicit and safety requirements remain satisfied.

A completed installation shall not be assumed ready for activation. Commissioning Readiness requires evidence that the configuration can be tested safely and meaningfully.

Successful readiness evaluation permits the authorized commissioning process to begin; it does not itself establish successful commissioning.

Commissioning results shall be returned as lifecycle evidence and may trigger recompilation before operational or BIOS activation outputs are released.

129. BIOS Deployment Readiness Evaluation

BIOS Deployment Readiness Evaluation determines whether a compiled configuration package is suitable for controlled installation, validation, and activation within the Building BIOS.

The compiler shall evaluate:

building and BIOS identities;

BIOS platform and version;

hardware and firmware compatibility;

active configuration state;

target configuration state;

node, cartridge, interface, sensor, and smart-module registries;

state-machine compatibility;

communication protocols;

permissions and authority;

safety interlocks;

cybersecurity requirements;

package integrity;

deployment sequence;

rollback and recovery provisions.

The Building BIOS shall remain the authoritative digital source for the building’s active configuration and operationally recognized state. The Digital Twin shall be initialized or updated from that governed BIOS state and related verified lifecycle information.

The compiler shall compare the deployment package with the observed and commissioned physical configuration. Missing components, identity conflicts, uncommissioned interfaces, incompatible firmware, invalid state transitions, and unresolved safety conditions shall block activation.

Deployment readiness shall distinguish package installation, validation, staging, authorization, activation, and rollback.

A valid package shall define its expected initial BIOS state. Deployment shall stop or require reevaluation when the actual state differs materially.

Safety-significant configuration changes shall require authenticated authorization and an auditable transition record.

The package shall include or reference required recovery information so that failed deployment does not leave the building in an undefined or unsafe state.

Successful BIOS Deployment Readiness establishes eligibility for controlled deployment. It does not authorize activation unless the designated human and system approvals are present.

130. Output Generation

Output Generation transforms the validated Canonical Engineering Representation and target-preparation artifacts into the requested human-readable and machine-readable deliverables.

Outputs may include:

engineering reports;

validation reports;

regulatory submission packages;

manufacturing files;

bills of materials;

assembly instructions;

robotic task packages;

inspection plans;

commissioning packages;

Building BIOS deployment packages;

Digital Twin initialization or update packages;

node, cartridge, interface, and component registries;

maintenance and lifecycle records;

conformance and certification artifacts.

Every output generator shall declare its supported target, input IR version, output schema, required readiness gates, precision behavior, and known limitations.

Output Generation shall preserve stable identities, resolved configuration, applicable units, coordinate systems, version information, provenance, validation status, and unresolved conditions.

The generator shall not invent missing engineering information to satisfy a target format.

Where output transformation aggregates, simplifies, approximates, discretizes, or omits information, the loss and its permitted use shall be declared.

Human-readable and machine-readable outputs derived from the same compilation shall remain semantically consistent.

Draft, informational, review, approved, released, and executable outputs shall be visibly distinguishable.

A target output shall include only the configuration alternatives authorized for that purpose. Unselected or unresolved alternatives shall not appear as executable instructions.

Every generated artifact shall be linked to its Compilation Request, Compilation Context, canonical model revision, target, generator version, and readiness status.

Output Signing and Packaging creates the final controlled deliverable, verifies its completeness, binds it to authorized identities, and protects it against undetected modification.

The final package shall include, as applicable:

package identity and version;

Compilation Request identity;

Compilation Context identity;

target identity;

resolved configuration identity;

output inventory;

compiler and generator versions;

dependency lock record;

validation summary;

unresolved conditions;

approval records;

provenance information;

lifecycle applicability;

integrity hashes;

digital signatures;

trusted timestamps;

deployment or use restrictions.

Every packaged object shall correspond to the manifest, and every manifest reference shall resolve to the correct object.

Signing policies shall distinguish compiler signatures, organizational release signatures, professional approvals, regulatory approvals, manufacturer signatures, commissioning acceptance, and deployment authorization. One signature type shall not be represented as another.

A valid compiler signature confirms that identified outputs were generated from a recorded compilation under a defined context. It does not independently prove engineering correctness or grant legal approval.

Executable manufacturing, robotic, commissioning, and BIOS packages shall require the stronger signing, authorization, and integrity controls defined by their targets.

Any modification after signing shall invalidate the affected signature or produce a new package identity and revision.

Encryption may protect confidentiality but shall not replace integrity verification or authorization.

The package shall be rejected when required content is missing, hashes do not match, signatures are invalid, credentials are revoked, or approval scope does not cover the compiled configuration.

The final package shall remain reproducible, auditable, and traceable throughout the applicable building lifecycle.