Decision Log (2026-02-12): Rotating CI Credentials While Self‑Recognition Content and Desktop UX Mature

Context#

Today’s changes cluster around two themes:

1) Ongoing expansion of self-recognition–related knowledge assets (including evaluation rigor, risk/decision calibration, cross-jurisdiction routing, and Japan-specific trust/consent context). 2) Iteration on a desktop client experience (icons, context menu, editor, and general UI stability), alongside a small but important CI credential update.

This entry focuses on the “decision” aspect: what operational and product-facing choices are implied by the updates, and why they matter.

What changed#

1) CI credential rotation (small diff, high impact)#

A CI authentication token configuration was updated with a small number of line edits (balanced additions and removals). Even though the diff is minimal, the intent is significant: maintain continuity of automated operations by keeping credentials current.

Decision captured: Treat credential rotation as routine maintenance, not an exceptional event—keep it lightweight, frequent, and controlled.

Impact:

• Reduces risk of automation failure due to expired/revoked tokens.
• Lowers exposure window if a token were ever compromised.

2) Self-recognition knowledge assets: turning research concepts into operational controls#

Multiple knowledge assets were updated/added around self-recognition, especially in areas that translate conceptual distinctions into deployable rules:

• Evaluation rigor: Emphasis on stricter protocols (e.g., ensuring controls and avoiding invalid inferences from behavior to “self-awareness”).
• Failure mode taxonomy: A structured way to label and analyze failure frames (environmental/perceptual, etc.) to avoid “blind” aggregate metrics.
• Decision calibration: Mapping outputs (e.g., likelihood ratios) into explicit decision thresholds with governance constraints.
• Cross-jurisdiction routing: Defining what to do when jurisdiction is EU/US/Japan/unknown, including “default to strict” handling under uncertainty.
• Japan-focused context: Institutional trust, disclosure norms, and operational implications for biometric/self-recognition deployments.

Decision captured: Move from “does it work?” to “can we operate it safely and defensibly?”—with explicit thresholds, controls, and documentation expectations.

Impact:

• Improves auditability and reduces category errors (e.g., conflating “verification” vs “identification,” or behavioral cues vs cognitive claims).
• Encourages measurable acceptance criteria rather than subjective interpretation.

3) Desktop UX and editor stability improvements#

There were updates across the desktop client surface (icons, menus, UI design, editor behavior, and related state/types), plus configuration changes consistent with a packaged desktop application.

Decision captured: Prioritize usability and stability in the desktop experience while the underlying knowledge and evaluation frameworks evolve.

Impact:

• Better day-to-day interaction reliability (fewer UI/editor rough edges).
• A more credible front-end for knowledge-driven workflows.

Why these decisions matter#

Credential hygiene is part of product reliability#

When automation depends on credentials, a “small change” can be the difference between uninterrupted delivery and a hard stop. Rotations also support least-privilege and incident containment practices.

Self-recognition work benefits from operationalization#

The knowledge updates reinforce a consistent principle: avoid over-claiming (“self-aware”) and instead document falsifiable criteria, controls, and failure labeling. That makes the work more portable across deployments and easier to evaluate over time.

UX work is the adoption multiplier#

Even well-designed evaluation and governance frameworks are hard to use if the desktop experience is brittle. Incremental UX improvements are a practical investment in adoption and correctness.

Outcome / current state#

• CI authentication is refreshed to keep automated tasks functioning.
• Self-recognition content is increasingly structured around decision thresholds, controlled evaluation, and jurisdiction-aware compliance logic.
• Desktop client UI/editor stability continues to improve, supporting practical use of the expanding knowledge base.