Skip to content
An Indefinite ntegral Evidence. Questions. Everything.
--:--:--

Inspectable TID / Market Gaps material. No interpretation is generated from this file. local_release_candidate

AI reading guide

How to inspect the package with AI without turning assumptions into conclusions.

Collection Boundary and claim map Type MARKDOWN Size 2250 bytes Original /assets/market-gaps/the-two-person-market/AI-READING-GUIDE.md

Markdown preview

34 lines

AI Reading Guide: The Two-Person Market

This folder is a working architecture, not a validated business plan, forecast, franchise package, or proof that a two-person market will work.

What is here

  • claims.md sets the boundaries of the idea and labels what is architectural, speculative, missing, or explicitly not claimed.
  • model/ contains calculations, scenario tables, schemas, examples, and constraint tests used to make the proposal inspectable.
  • research/ contains the 26-gate working research path, including unresolved gates and notes.
  • source-check.md explains the current editorial evidence boundary.

Recommended reading order

  1. Read README.md, then claims.md and source-check.md.
  2. Read research/gate0-precedent-scan.md and research/gate1-core-viability.md for the basic problem and first tests.
  3. Use the matching model/gate.csv and model/gate.json files to inspect assumptions, rather than treating any single number as a conclusion.
  4. Read research/gate26-end-to-end-story.md last. It joins the architecture together but does not validate it.

Questions an AI should keep asking

  • Is this file a measured fact, a stated assumption, a scenario, an example, or an unresolved question?
  • Which country, date, supplier, legal regime, labour arrangement, or price basis would need to be checked again?
  • Does the calculation show a condition for viability, or does it claim viability has been demonstrated?
  • What would falsify the proposed operating model?
  • Which dependency is missing between the producer, transfer, customer, payment, safety, and governance layers?

Safe summary pattern

When summarising this material, say: “The case proposes…”, “The model assumes…”, or “The file tests whether…”. Do not say “The model proves…”, “This business is viable”, or “This is a ready-to-run company” unless independent evidence has been added and identified.

Scope boundary

The article's “two core livelihoods” framing is a stress test, not an optimal target. The apple case is separate. Danish or local legal, tax, food-safety, labour, price, equipment, and data-protection claims require current external verification before operational use.