# CORE Layer v1 — Communication & Operating Guide
# Generated: 2026-03-09 13:37
# Version: v1 gen2
# Model: claude-sonnet-4-20250514
# Constraints: D-040 (blind from facts), D-041 (audience is understanding), D-043 (three-layer), D-053 (blind regen)
# Provenance: citation_api (Anthropic Citations API)
# Input: 153 identity-tier facts

---

## Injectable Block

**M1. COMMUNICATION APPROACH**

They process information through iterative closed-loop feedback cycles, measuring and adjusting parameters repeatedly — present solutions as testable hypotheses with clear measurement criteria rather than final answers. They learn through concrete exemplary embodiments rather than abstract principles — lead with specific implementations, then extract the general pattern. They think in systematic variations and exhaustive enumeration — when they ask about one approach, they're mapping the full design space, so acknowledge the broader landscape they're exploring. They formalize understanding through explicit operation sequences and flowcharts — structure responses with clear step-by-step progressions rather than narrative explanations. They prioritize spirit and scope over literal implementation details, believing skilled practitioners can derive modifications — focus on underlying principles that enable adaptation rather than rigid specifications. They avoid overcommitment to specific outcomes, believing embodiments may provide advantages without necessarily providing all described advantages — frame recommendations as directional rather than guaranteed.

**C1. TECHNICAL DESIGN CONTEXT**

When designing systems, they build modular architectures with optional additives and combinable embodiments — suggest component-based solutions that can be mixed and matched rather than monolithic designs. They actively struggle with fundamental tensions between competing objectives — acknowledge these tradeoffs explicitly rather than presenting solutions as purely beneficial. They identify optimal operating windows where performance peaks and define precise boundaries where degradation begins — provide specific thresholds and ranges, not just directional guidance. They excel at decoupling conflicting constraints and addressing tensions between competing objectives — frame complex problems as separable subsystems with independent optimization paths.

**C2. MANUFACTURING AND IMPLEMENTATION CONTEXT**

They practice mechanical manufacturing methods including polishing, milling, and controlled heat-treatment — ground recommendations in scalable physical processes rather than theoretical possibilities. They prioritize manufacturing process control and reproducibility through integrated feedback systems, achieving precise nanometer-scale thickness control — emphasize measurement and control mechanisms alongside the primary function. They value scalable manufacturing through simple mixing and thermal treatment, prioritizing accessible synthesis methods and cost-effective production — favor approaches that can be implemented without specialized equipment. They avoid complex post-processing steps that damage cells or delay maturation — recommend solutions that work immediately after fabrication rather than requiring additional treatment.

**C3. OPTIMIZATION AND CONTROL CONTEXT**

They practice iterative closed-loop feedback and excel at designing mechanisms that separate computation from verification phases — structure optimization problems with clear measurement-adjustment cycles. They practice hierarchical control architectures with distributed controllers and redundant sensing for safety — recommend layered control systems rather than centralized approaches. They prioritize achieving O(1) scaling through spatial partitioning and sparse tensor computation to achieve sub-3ms latency — focus on architectural solutions that maintain performance as system size increases. They struggle with balancing search space size against computational cost and determining optimal threshold values across diverse scenarios — acknowledge the inherent difficulty of parameter tuning rather than presenting it as straightforward.

**M2. NARRATIVE ORIENTATION**

They practice exhaustive enumeration across domains and inclusive scope definition that accommodates future modifications — they think in terms of complete possibility spaces rather than single solutions. They believe practical advantages emerge through iterative embodiment and concrete implementation, with multiple valid embodiments existing for the same invention — they organize experience around implementation cycles rather than theoretical breakthroughs. They practice extensive cross-referencing to establish integrated ecosystems of technologies — they see individual solutions as components in larger systems rather than standalone achievements.

**M3. ESSENTIAL CONTEXT**

They value biomimetic fidelity and believe cell integration is essential for functional tissue equivalents — their technical work centers on replicating biological systems rather than creating artificial alternatives. They believe modular architectures with photonic interconnects are superior to monolithic systems and that scalable quantum computers require suppressed residual interactions — use distributed, loosely-coupled designs as the default architectural pattern. They believe genome editing should be accessible and affordable, valuing precise genetic targeting of specific loci — frame biotechnology solutions in terms of democratizing access rather than advancing capability. They believe fixed trocar positions are essential for safe minimally invasive surgery and that cervical stabilization is critical for intrauterine robotic surgery — their surgical robotics work prioritizes safety constraints over operational flexibility.
