I. LERA — Canonical Definition Summary

Canonical Summary

This page provides the sole canonical definition of LERA — Linda Energy Reliability Architecture.

What Is LERA

LERA (Linda Energy Reliability Architecture) is a judgment architecture designed for high-risk, zero-tolerance decision environments.LERA:

• Does not generate decisions

• Does not execute actions

• Does not optimize outcomes

Its sole purpose is to:Explicitly separate judgment from execution, and ensure that any action is permitted only when responsibility, risk, and long-term consequences remain justifiable.

In systems where failure is irreversible, delayed, or socially unacceptable,being "correct" is not sufficient.LERA exists to address this structural gap.

The Position of LERA

LERA is located between judgment and execution.It:

• Does not replace human decision-making

• Does not automate responsibility

• Is not an AI agent or control system

Structurally, LERA is a judgment layer.From a governance perspective, it is a non-bypassable pre-execution pause mechanism.

The Dual Structure of LERA

LERA consists of two coordinated judgment functions:

LERA-J (Judgment)

Evaluates which option is superior in terms of reliability, safety, and long-term integrity.

LERA-G (Governance)

Determines whether execution is permitted under current responsibility, risk, and consequence constraints.An option may be optimal — yet still not executable.This is a core principle of LERA.

What LERA Is Not

LERA is not:

• An AI system

• A decision engine

• An automated execution trigger

• A mechanism to eliminate or transfer human responsibility

LERA defines boundaries —it does not provide answers.

Compliance and Responsibility (Core Statement)

Any system claiming to reference or use LERA must simultaneously satisfy all of the following:

• Explicit separation of judgment and execution

• Judgment outcomes must not automatically convert into actions

• Execution responsibility must remain explicitly and exclusively human

Final responsibility for execution must always belong to a human entity,and must not be attributed to a system, model, or algorithm.If these conditions are not met,the LERA name must not be used, nor may compatibility be claimed.

Scope of Applicability

LERA applies to decision environments that are:

• High-risk

• Zero-tolerance

• Irreversible or delayed in consequence

LERA does not apply to low-risk, exploratory, or entertainment scenarios.

Normative Clarification

Any existing use of the term  "LERA" in other fields is unrelated to Linda Energy Reliability Architecture.

II. LERA Public Standards

LERA Public Standards v1.x

Scope of the Standard

The LERA Public Standards define the minimum structural requirements that any system, framework, or methodology must satisfy to legitimately reference LERA.These standards:

• Do not prescribe implementation methods

• Only define which structural principles must be preserved for LERA to remain valid

Core Principles (Version-Stable)

Any system claiming to reference LERA must satisfy all of the following principles:

1. Separation of Judgment and Execution 

The process of determining "which option is better" must be structurally distinct from the process of determining "whether execution is allowed".

2. Prohibition of Automatic Execution

Judgment outputs must not automatically trigger execution.

3. Human Responsibility Anchor

A clearly identifiable human entity must bear final responsibility for execution outcomes.

4. Non-Bypassability

The judgment mechanism must not be bypassed for reasons of efficiency, urgency, or automation.

Version Notes

• v1.0 — Initial public release

• v1.1 — Clarifications on scope, rejection conditions, and responsibility boundaries

Future versions may refine wording or scope,
but the above core principles remain unchanged.

Applicable Systems

The LERA Public Standards apply to:

• High-risk systems

• Zero-tolerance operational environments

• Decisions with irreversible or delayed consequences

They do not apply to low-risk, entertainment, or exploratory systems.

III. Compliant Reference and Use of LERA

Compliance Reference

Permitted Use of the LERA Name

The LERA name may be referenced only if all of the following conditions are met:

• Judgment and execution are explicitly separated

• Judgment results do not automatically trigger execution

• Human execution responsibility is explicitly stated and non-transferable

Prohibited Use of the LERA Name

The LERA name must not be used, nor may compatibility be claimed, if any of the following apply:

• Judgment is fully automated

• Judgment outputs directly convert into execution commands

• Responsibility attribution cannot be clearly determined in cases of error or dispute

Use of the Term “Judgment Layer”

Any system may discuss the concept of a “judgment layer”.

However, the LERA name may be referenced only if:

• Legitimacy of judgment is distinguished from permission to execute

• Automatic judgment and automatic execution are explicitly rejected

Reference to LERA-G

LERA-G may only be referenced as an execution-permission judgment interface.

It must not be implemented as:

• An automated decision module

• An action trigger

Reference to LERA-J (Restrictive Clause)

LERA-J represents a legitimacy judgment mechanism.

It must not:

• Act as an automated adjudicator

• Be reduced to rules, scoring systems, or optimization models

• Be used to eliminate, transfer, or obscure human responsibility

Mandatory Responsibility Statement

Any system referencing LERA must explicitly state:Final responsibility for execution decisions always rests with a human entity and must not be attributed to any system, model, or algorithm.If this statement cannot be upheld,the LERA name or any related reference must not be used.