Research, Software and Capability Map

Public institutional reference for research programmes, software platforms, engineering lineages, operational capabilities, cultural stewardship and ecosystem roles.

IMSV.org / Tegrity.AI · OÜ JUBAP / JubAp.eu · JubAp.Net · JubAp.us / RFC AIPI7504159D6 / RFC VACC791202G11

Current as of 30 June 2026 · Version 1.2 — Public Reference

Prepared from official ecosystem websites, published papers, public field notes, case studies and public institutional materials.

Document control

Executive synthesis

The ecosystem is best understood as a distributed capability system rather than a consolidated corporate group or a single product company. IMSV.org provides the international institutional and stewardship layer; Tegrity.AI is its research and publication circle; OÜ JUBAP / JubAp.eu provides the principal Estonian and EU-facing transformation, funding, commercial and market-access node; JubAp.Net provides the principal frontier-engineering, adaptive-systems and deployment lineage; and JubAp.us provides an Americas-facing integration and value-realisation node. Historical activities and archives provide additional source evidence without becoming interchangeable legal persons.

The consolidated architecture contains five principal research and methodological programmes, supported by an applied engineering platform and a cross-entity programme-delivery layer:

• Structural Awareness — the umbrella programme explaining and measuring divergence between the real flow of work and the representations used to govern it.
• Regime Awareness and Context Stability — detection of structural weakening and context invalidity before failure becomes visible.
• AI Integrity Management and AI Operational Integrity Architecture — the enterprise function and systems architecture needed when AI becomes mission-critical.
• Rationalization, Capability Discovery and AI Readiness — enterprise self-knowledge, value discovery, process intelligence and portfolio decisions under complexity.
• JUBAP Human and Organisational Transformation — the perspective, intervention and movement layer that translates diagnosis into executable change.
• Adaptive Operational Intelligence and Frontier Engineering — the field-proven engineering substrate represented by GEPLAN, xSeil, Phylons, process-intelligence and mission-critical deployment patterns.
• Software, Data and Platform Capabilities — the reusable architectures, modules, decision engines, data pipelines, evaluation environments and delivery patterns that connect the research programmes with operational systems.
• Programme Stewardship, Funding and Consortium Delivery — the institutional, funding, validation, regulatory and commercial pathways that move research into public-interest outputs, pilots and sustainable deployment.

Contents

1. Purpose, scope and interpretation

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this guide is to provide one current and navigable public description of the research programmes, software platforms, frameworks, technical lineages, market-facing capabilities, cultural initiatives and institutional roles associated with The Integral Management Society / IMSV.org ecosystem.

1.2 Objects kept separate

1.3 Priority attribution is not exclusivity

For readability, each capability is assigned to one or more primary capability homes. A primary home is the node most closely associated with ordinary stewardship, research design, technical development, operational deployment, market coordination or regional integration. This is a default functional baseline, not a closed allocation.

• Other participants may contribute to research, engineering, validation, financing, missions, commercialisation or implementation.
• A work-package lead may differ from the ordinary capability home where the project requires different expertise, jurisdiction, infrastructure or funding eligibility.
• Capability attribution does not decide intellectual-property title, authorship, employment, agency, transfer pricing, regulated-product responsibility, tax residence or permanent establishment.
• A specific programme or collaboration may use a different functional distribution where its documented work, expertise, infrastructure or jurisdiction requires it.

1.4 Chronology and evidentiary boundary

The current programme architecture is partly retrospective. Production systems and transformation cases developed over many years were later compared, abstracted and organised into the present research language. Tegrity.AI and several series were still being completed after the end of 2025; the public corpus visible in 2026 is therefore the current synthesis of a longer engineering and research trajectory, not a claim that every current title or maturity level existed during the original field work.

2. Ecosystem architecture and default functional specialisation

The ecosystem combines legally independent organisations, operating nodes, public brands and historical source activities. The table below is functional and descriptive. It is not a statement of consolidated control or automatic common ownership.

2.1 Default operating logic

3. Consolidated programme architecture

3.1 One throughline across the ecosystem

The common throughline is structural awareness: understanding the real dependencies, contributions, constraints and load-bearing parts of a system well enough to act without destroying them. The Structural Awareness programme explains why this faculty is lost; Rationalization and JUBAP diagnose and recover it in organisations; Regime Awareness detects its loss dynamically in adaptive systems; and Frontier Engineering converts the resulting insight into running systems and interventions.

4. Programme A — Structural Awareness

Structural Awareness is the umbrella research programme connecting four disciplinary series that start from different primitives but converge on a common operational phenomenon: organisations govern work through maps, records, architectures, ownership statements and metrics that diverge from the real flow of contribution and dependency. Decisions taken through the divergent representation feed back into the real system and can deform or destroy the very capabilities on which performance depends.

Principal public references: Structural Awareness — synthesis and index · Tegrity.AI Field Notes.

4.1 Core conceptual distinctions

4.2 Series 1 — The Cost of Clarity

The Cost of Clarity is the information-theory and transformation-economics branch. It rejects the assumption that the information required by transformation is a free input. It studies the cost and risk of producing the minimum reliable information needed before an initiative can be committed, governed or evaluated.

A current applied-research proposal translates this programme into a measurement instrument with candidate readings including discovery cost, declarative burden, decision cost, absorption cost, value at risk and unseen scope. The proposed validation combines historical post-mortem reconstruction with pre-mortem prediction on live initiative backlogs.

Principal public reference: The Cost of Clarity series.

4.3 Series 2 — The Attribution Gap

The Attribution Gap is the economics and enterprise-architecture branch. It studies the widening distance between structural dependency on a capability and the formal credit, ownership, authority or funding assigned to it. The proposed mechanism is decay by incentive rather than simple neglect: making a dependency visible can redistribute credit and power, creating pressure to keep critical contributions implicit.

Principal public references: The Attribution Gap series.

4.4 Series 3 — The Human Intelligence Gap / Human Intelligence Debt

This organisational-theory branch measures the difference between the cognitive contribution humans could make in a well-architected organisation and the contribution actually realised when people reconcile systems, re-enter data, validate outputs and compensate for fragmentation. The current framework distinguishes an Optimal Human Intelligence Ratio, observed Human Intelligence Density and the resulting Operational Intelligence Debt.

Principal public references: The Human Intelligence Gap series.

4.5 Series 4 — Informational Friction

Informational Friction is the systems-theory branch. It removes the specifically human motive and studies the general case of a system whose controller acts through a representation that has diverged from the real flow. Because action changes the flow, representation error becomes a feedback mechanism rather than a passive description problem.

Principal public references: Informational Friction series.

4.6 Programme-level capabilities and current status

• Structural-discovery and map-flow divergence diagnostics.
• Minimum-information and clarity-cost estimation before transformation commitment.
• Capability-contribution, attribution and ownership-silence measurement.
• Human cognitive-capacity and compensating-work measurement.
• Conformance counterfactuals, deviance-dependence and automation-interaction testing.
• Revalue-before-clarify and capability-preservation decision gates.
• A cross-disciplinary falsification programme using records organisations already hold.

Current status: Publicly articulated multi-series programme with foundational papers, measurement protocols, field notes and proposed empirical studies. Scientific and commercial claims remain differentiated by document status and require independent validation where stated.

5. Programme B — Regime Awareness and Context Stability

Regime Awareness studies how adaptive, operational and technological systems lose structural stability before failure is visible. It is narrower than universal forecasting: the capability is to detect that the context supporting current behaviour, thresholds or decisions is no longer reliable, and to adjust observation, buffers, redundancy, priorities, action or abstention before instability propagates.

Principal public references: Minimalistic Regime-Aware Early Warning Systems · Regime Awareness Capability — field case.

5.1 Core research capabilities

5.2 Engineering lineage and extracted mechanisms

5.3 Current roadmap

1. Independent theoretical, mathematical and implementation review.
2. Frozen reference artefacts and leakage-audited held-out evaluation.
3. Co-development with research, industrial and public-sector partners in bounded work packages.
4. Pilot implementations in environments where context validity, cascading effects and operational resilience matter.
5. Open and interoperable reference components where rights, confidentiality and validation permit, while preserving private implementation layers where justified.

Current status: A field-derived and increasingly formal research programme. Some engineering mechanisms are field-proven; the domain-agnostic detector, context-selection layer and broad performance claims remain candidates under validation.

6. Programme C — AI Integrity Management and Operational Integrity Architecture

This programme has two distinct but connected layers. AI Integrity Management is the proposed enterprise discipline that coordinates safety, governance, explainability, cybersecurity, compliance, MLOps, operational reliability and value. AI Operational Integrity Architecture examines the system design itself: statistical AI cores surrounded by deterministic guardrails, rules and controls, and what happens when the environment changes or the control envelope becomes fragile.

Principal public references: AI Integrity Management series · AI Operational Integrity Architecture · Tegrity.AI overview.

6.1 Enterprise-function workstream

6.2 Operational-architecture workstream

6.3 Cross-cutting capability set

• Regulator- and standard-aware enterprise architecture for AI-enabled systems.
• Integration of security, auditability, risk, compliance, data and operational continuity into design rather than post-hoc control.
• Deterministic guardrails and expert-system envelopes around statistical components.
• Regime-aware integrity, dynamic thresholds, abstention and bounded escalation.
• Human oversight capacity, prioritisation and residual-risk management.
• Legacy and third-party integration under real operational constraints.
• Cost discipline and demonstrable operational and human value.

Current status: An emerging discipline and architecture corpus, practitioner-oriented and open to challenge. It provides a coherent capability map but does not replace statutory responsibilities, product certification, cybersecurity, risk management or domain-specific assurance.

7. Programme D — Rationalization, Capability Discovery and AI Readiness

This is the most mature market-facing and applied-development programme. It treats rationalization not as deletion or IT hygiene, but as the disciplined construction of enterprise self-knowledge: a governed view of applications, processes, data, capabilities, dependencies, cost, risk and value that permits simplification without destroying adaptation, identity or load-bearing capability. The AI-readiness thesis is that an organisation cannot govern or interpret AI reliably when its own architecture remains a black box.

Principal public references: JubAp.eu Field Notes · JubAp.eu Field Notes — page 2.

7.1 Programme components

7.2 Core capability pipeline

1. Establish a trustworthy footprint from public records, repositories, CMDB/APM data, process logs, interviews and financial evidence.
2. Map applications and processes to business capabilities, owners, users, dependencies, risk, service levels and cost.
3. Identify hidden, dormant, local or rare capabilities before recommending standardisation or removal.
4. Separate immediate efficiency from propagation, resilience, cultural fit, strategic option value and downstream impact.
5. Generate evidence-based keep, consolidate, scale, transform, federate, retire or investigate decisions.
6. Translate decisions into a sequenced roadmap, business case, funding path and controlled implementation.
7. Use AI and small-language-model assistance for extraction, contradiction detection and synthesis while preserving human accountability and evidence traceability.

7.3 Primary functional homes

Current status: Commercially mature service and capability family with active methodological, software and evidence-architecture development. Commercial delivery and reusable research remain distinct activity types within the wider programme.

8. Programme E — JUBAP Human and Organisational Transformation

JUBAP — Jump Up Business Action Plan — is the historical transformation framework and the origin of the ecosystem name. It is designed for organisations that already possess methods, standards and expertise but still cannot translate strategy into coordinated movement. Its emphasis is not another methodology layer, but the identification of high-leverage button points, concrete resistance, joinable action and a perspective shift that reveals actions previously hidden by the existing frame.

8.1 Framework and research components

8.2 Evidence and application base

The framework has been applied and refined through organisational transformation, industrial, infrastructure, logistics and corporate environments. Public ecosystem materials associate its naming and structured use with a multinational manufacturing intervention, later bottom-up airport transformation, mission-critical logistics and current portfolio-rationalization work. These cases are used as field evidence and do not make every historical mandate a current programme asset of every ecosystem entity.

8.3 Primary functional homes

Current status: Historical and field-tested framework under continued enhancement. Current research links to Structural Awareness, Human Intelligence Debt, value discovery and initiative-fragility measurement should be distinguished from the pre-existing method.

9. Capability Platform — Adaptive Operational Intelligence and Frontier Engineering

This platform is the field-proven engineering substrate behind the research programmes. It combines mission-critical systems engineering, operational intelligence, enterprise and integration architecture, data normalisation, live deployment, governance and operational stabilisation. It is not one new product and should not be presented as if every engine were a 2025 or 2026 invention.

Principal public references: JubAp.Net case studies · xSeil whitepaper.

9.1 Engineering and platform lineages

9.2 Transversal engineering capabilities

9.3 Honest status taxonomy for engineering claims

Software capability in this ecosystem is broader than a current product SKU. It includes field-proven operational platforms, reusable software modules, data and integration architectures, decision engines, reference implementations, controlled evaluation environments and deployment patterns. The catalogue below restores these capabilities as a first-class part of the public ecosystem map.

10. Software, Data and Platform Capability Catalogue

10.1 Mission-critical software architecture and integration

Public basis: JubAp.Net overview and case studies; GEPLAN public case; xSeil whitepaper; JubAp.us field cases.

10.2 GEPLAN — integrated industrial and operational software

GEPLAN represents the historical integrated-platform lineage: a modular operational environment combining industrial logistics, maintenance, supply, telemetry, field execution and management intelligence. Its significance is not a single legacy application, but the reusable architecture of an operational truth source connected to execution.

Public basis: JubAp.Net GEPLAN case studies and the public «Mexico Before Industry 4.0» historical context article.

10.3 xSeil — pre-agentic logistics operating platform

xSeil was designed as a complete logistics operating system rather than a narrow route solver. Its historical architecture connected a central web control environment with mobile field execution and organised the platform into six interoperating layers.

Its decision-intelligence layer contributed a set of reusable mechanisms that remain central to the ecosystem’s adaptive-systems research:

Public basis: JubAp.Net xSeil case study, xSeil whitepaper and the public pre-agentic logistics article.

10.4 Phylons and regime-aware signal architectures

Public basis: JubAp.Net Phylons case material, Tegrity.AI Regime Awareness field case and Regime Awareness series.

10.5 Car Evolution — shared-mobility intelligence concepts

Public basis: JubAp.Net Car Evolution case study and public one-page concept reference.

10.6 Enterprise intelligence, rationalization and diagnostic software

Public basis: JubAp.eu Field Notes and case-study pages, supplemented by the publicly articulated JUBAP and IMSV methodology architecture.

10.7 AI integrity, context-selection and evaluation software

Public basis: Tegrity.AI Regime Awareness series, Minimalistic Regime-Aware Early Warning Systems, the field case and the AI Integrity Management architecture pages.

10.8 Software assurance, data governance and deployment

Public basis: JubAp.Net frontier-engineering and Tiger Team pages; Tegrity.AI governance and architecture pages; public field cases.

11. Capability attribution map

The following tables identify the priority capability home or homes as of the reference date. They are intentionally non-exclusive and may be overridden by project-specific evidence and agreements.

11.1 Research, stewardship and publication

11.2 Adaptive systems and AI integrity

11.3 Rationalization, transformation and value discovery

11.4 Engineering, delivery and regional integration

11.5 Funding, market access and programme operations

11.6 Software, data and platform capability homes

The detailed catalogue in Section 10 is attributed below on a priority and non-exclusive basis. Project partners may contribute to or lead individual modules according to the actual work, expertise and infrastructure required.

12. Maturity, evidence, release and commercialisation pathways

12.1 Evidence status

12.2 Release and use pathways

12.3 Commercial and public-interest lifecycle

• A capability may remain commercially active, become dormant, lose an immediate market or retain a high residual public-interest value.
• IMSV may act as steward for preservation, validation, open research, controlled reactivation or preparation for renewed commercialisation where authorised.
• OÜ JUBAP is the preferred but non-exclusive commercial coordination channel for joint or reactivated capabilities unless a project-specific record provides otherwise.
• Stewardship, funding, hosting, invoicing or commercial coordination does not by itself remove attribution or compensation rights of original authors, holders or contributors.
• Open release and commercial reactivation are separate decisions and may apply to different layers, versions or components of the same capability.

13. Heritage, Patrimony and Frontier Institutions

The ecosystem also develops a distinct public-interest capability family around heritage, patrimony, living archives, craft continuity, frontier institutions, migration and transnational capability transfer. These activities extend the same concerns with attribution, continuity, resilience and preservation into cultural and territorial settings.

13.1 Heritage, patrimony and living-archive capabilities

These capabilities concern stewardship, continuity, cultural production, research and the preservation of living knowledge. Stewardship does not by itself imply ownership of a property, archive, craft lineage, object or associated intellectual property.

13.2 Frontier institutions, diaspora and transnational capability transfer

13.3 Relationship to the wider capability system

Heritage and frontier-institution capabilities are not peripheral to the technology programmes. They provide field settings for studying attribution, continuity, tacit knowledge, institutional memory, human capability, migration, resilience and the conditions under which valuable practices survive technological and economic change.

Appendix A — Current paper and series index

This index captures the public corpus visible at the reference date. Document status is governed by the individual page and may range from field note to working paper, foundational paper, protocol, synthesis or forthcoming item.

Appendix B — Public source register

B.1 Public sources referenced

• Minimalistic Regime-Aware Early Warning Systems — Tegrity.AI.
• Regime Awareness Capability — field case — Tegrity.AI.
• JubAp.Net case studies.
• xSeil whitepaper — JubAp.Net.
• GEPLAN — mission-critical logistics intelligence for PEMEX (2006).
• GEPLAN — Mexico before Industry 4.0.
• xSeil / Experiencias Xcaret — pre-agentic logistics intelligence.

Additional public pages consulted for this consolidation (Tegrity.AI main programme and governance, Structural Awareness synthesis, The Attribution Gap, The Human Intelligence Gap, The Cost of Clarity, Informational Friction, Regime Awareness in Adaptive Systems, AI Integrity Management series, AI Operational Integrity Architecture, JubAp.Net frontier engineering, JubAp.us cases, JubAp.eu Field Notes, GEPLAN and Car Evolution public references) were accessed for this consolidation on 30 June 2026.

B.2 Source interpretation

This guide consolidates public descriptions produced by the ecosystem and selected public case materials. Historical names, metrics, trademarks and technical statements describe the published capability narrative; they do not constitute independent scientific validation, customer endorsement, regulatory certification or a guarantee of current product availability.