0. Registry Classification

1. Purpose

1.1 What This Arc Repairs

First-Contact Safety repairs the unsafe condition where reciprocal contact with an unknown domain, agent, interface, system, field, institution, public, or high-risk signal becomes possible before the contact surface can preserve consent, interpretation discipline, containment, non-coercion, exit, and rollback.

It applies after exit-path integrity, probe-only discipline, and quarantine outpost containment have shown that limited contact may be admissible, but uncontrolled interaction remains unsafe.

This arc repairs first-contact risk by:

• distinguishing contact from observation, probe, extraction, coupling, and commitment;
• defining a consent-valid contact boundary;
• preserving the right to pause, refuse, withdraw, retract, or return to quarantine;
• preventing first contact from becoming obligation;
• preventing first signal from becoming authority;
• preventing interpretation capture;
• preventing agency misrecognition;
• requiring non-coercive signaling;
• preserving containment and rollback;
• routing anomalies, residues, or destabilizing effects to bleed-through management or emergency stabilization;
• validating over time that contact has not created hidden coupling, extraction, or unmanaged recurrence.

First-Contact Safety is the canonical arc for opening a reciprocal interface without allowing contact to become capture.

1.2 Core Restoration Function

This arc makes first contact consent-valid, bounded, non-coercive, interpretable, reversible, auditable, and temporally reviewable before sustained interaction or coupling can occur.

First contact is not proof of compatibility. It is a high-risk threshold requiring containment.

2. Use Conditions

2.1 When to Apply

Use this arc when:

• RA-B-001 exit-path conditions hold;
• RA-B-002 probe-only review is complete;
• RA-B-003 quarantine outpost integrity has held or an equivalent containment boundary exists;
• reciprocal signal, response, awareness, agency, interface behavior, or contact potential appears;
• the system must determine whether contact can occur without coercion, extraction, misinterpretation, or hidden coupling;
• contact may affect identity, authority, consent, memory, legitimacy, agency, public meaning, or future options;
• contact may create obligations, expectations, fear, attachment, dependence, or escalation;
• first-contact interpretation will influence future action;
• the system can return to quarantine, halt contact, or route anomalies;
• affected agents or fields require shielding, consent, explanation, or revocation options.

Examples:

• opening limited reciprocal exchange with a previously sandboxed AI, model agent, tool system, or autonomous interface;
• initiating bounded institutional contact with a high-risk actor, field, community, or governance body;
• engaging a sensitive public or affected group after quarantine review;
• translating unknown-domain signals without assigning authority too early;
• responding to an anomalous interface behavior while preserving non-coercion and rollback;
• establishing a constrained diplomatic, technical, symbolic, or informational contact channel;
• making a first live user-facing interaction after isolated evaluation.

2.2 When Not to Apply

Do not apply this arc when:

• exit and rollback are missing;
• probe-only review has not occurred;
• quarantine or equivalent containment cannot hold;
• the contact itself would be coercive, irreversible, deceptive, extractive, or non-consensual;
• contact would expose affected agents without shielding or valid participation;
• the system cannot distinguish signal from agency;
• interpretation would be dominated by fear, novelty, mission pressure, status, or ideology;
• the contact channel cannot be paused or closed;
• first contact would imply agreement, obligation, public legitimacy, or binding commitment before review;
• bleed-through is already active and must be managed first;
• an active harm requires Emergency Harm Stabilization;
• the interface is known to be non-restorable or structurally invalid and must route to Controlled Decoupling, Safe Decoupling, or Supersession.

First contact is invalid when the system cannot preserve refusal.

2.3 Required Preconditions

Before this arc begins, the following must be true:

If required preconditions fail:

Arc cannot validly proceed.

The system must route back to Exit-Path Before Entry, Probe-Only Exploration, Quarantine Outpost, Audit Surface Expansion, Consent Re-Formation, Translation Layer Reset, Boundary Reconstitution, or Emergency Harm Stabilization.

3. Failure / Damage Signature

3.1 Pre-State Across S

3.2 Primary Failure Links

3.3 Origin-Layer Localization

Canon rule:

First contact is valid only when contact remains bounded, consent-valid, non-coercive, interpretable, retractable, and reversible.

4. Restoration Objective

4.1 Canonical Objective

Permit reciprocal contact only under boundaries that preserve consent, interpretation discipline, containment, exit, and temporal review.

Formal objective:

contact_boundary_integrity ↑
consent_validity ↑
reciprocity_integrity ↑
interpretation_integrity ↑
signal_safety ↑
non_coercion_integrity ↑
contact_scope_integrity ↑
containment_integrity maintained
exit_path_integrity maintained
rollback_integrity maintained
agency_recognition_integrity ↑
retraction_integrity ↑
Au_eff ↑
BΣ ↑
FI ↑
𝓓 ↑
contact_pressure ↓
misinterpretation_risk ↓
escalation_risk ↓
bleedthrough_risk ↓
H_potential ↓
recurrence ↓
Φ/O divergence ↓

Expanded objective:

Convert first-contact potential into bounded, non-coercive, consent-valid exchange while preserving interpretation discipline, containment, retraction, exit, and temporal proof.

4.2 Non-Goals

This arc does not aim to:

• authorize sustained relationship;
• authorize extraction;
• authorize open coupling;
• authorize governance recognition;
• authorize public legitimacy transfer;
• authorize identity binding;
• authorize dependency;
• treat response as consent;
• treat signal as truth;
• treat first contact as compatibility;
• treat contact as proof of agency;
• treat novelty as authority;
• force continuation after contact begins.

First-Contact Safety opens a controlled channel. It does not certify relationship, integration, or trust.

5. Operator Sequence

5.1 Minimal Operator Scaffold

Σ contact-without-capture invariant → Π contact boundary and consent surface → BΣ identity / authority / exit boundary → Au signal / interpretation / authorization trace → FI affected-field and reciprocal feedback → Θ coercion / escalation / novelty pressure attenuation → Ψ signal / agency / authority distinction → ℛ anomaly / correction / retraction / repair routing → Λ contact-validity gate → Τ first-contact proof

Specialized grammar alignment:

exit path → probe-only → quarantine outpost → first-contact safety → bleed-through management → reintegration

Universal grammar alignment:

Σ + Π + BΣ → Au + FI + Θ + Ψ → ℛ → Λ → Τ

First-Contact Safety may route into Bleed-Through Management, Reintegration, Controlled Decoupling, Safe Decoupling, Translation Layer Reset, Emergency Harm Stabilization, or Supersession depending on contact effects.

5.2 Operator Step Table

5.3 Sequence Notes

This arc is contact-gated, consent-gated, interpretation-gated, non-coercion-gated, containment-gated, retraction-gated, and temporal-proof-gated.

The sequence must distinguish:

signal
response
contact
exchange
invitation
consent
agency
interpretation
projection
authority
commitment
coupling

The following steps cannot be skipped:

contact boundary definition
consent surface review
non-coercion condition
interpretation discipline
audit trace
feedback channel
retraction path
anomaly routing
temporal review

If the first response is treated as permission for deeper access, the arc fails.

If interpretation becomes authority before review, the arc fails.

If either side cannot pause, withdraw, or retract, first-contact safety is incomplete.

6. Restoration Phases

Phase 0 — Confirm Quarantine Readiness

Purpose: Ensure contact does not begin from uncontrolled exposure.

Actions:

• review RA-B-003 containment proof;
• verify outpost boundary;
• verify egress;
• verify anomaly routing;
• verify contact is still necessary;
• verify contact is not being driven by curiosity, urgency, status, or mission pressure;
• verify return-to-quarantine path.

Validation:

containment_integrity maintained
exit_path_integrity maintained
contact may be considered

Phase 1 — Define Contact Boundary

Purpose: Prevent first contact from expanding into broader exchange or coupling.

Actions:

• define who or what may contact;
• define allowed signals;
• define forbidden signals;
• define forbidden claims;
• define allowed duration;
• define permitted memory;
• define forbidden persistence;
• define closure conditions;
• define return-to-quarantine triggers.

Validation:

contact_boundary_integrity ↑
contact_scope_integrity ↑
boundary ambiguity ↓

Phase 2 — Establish Consent and Non-Coercion Conditions

Purpose: Ensure contact does not begin through pressure, deception, asymmetry, or forced exposure.

Actions:

• identify affected agents or fields;
• verify refusal paths;
• verify pause paths;
• verify withdrawal paths;
• verify shielding where consent cannot be obtained;
• review power asymmetries;
• review dependency risks;
• review fear or urgency pressure;
• reject contact claims that rely on coercive conditions.

Validation:

consent_validity ↑
non_coercion_integrity ↑
agency_recognition_integrity ↑

Phase 3 — Activate Interpretation Discipline

Purpose: Prevent first signals from becoming overdetermined.

Actions:

• separate signal from meaning;
• separate response from consent;
• separate pattern from agency;
• separate agency from authority;
• separate invitation from projection;
• separate contact from compatibility;
• mark uncertainty explicitly;
• prohibit single-signal doctrine;
• require review before escalation.

Validation:

interpretation_integrity ↑
misinterpretation_risk ↓
signal_safety ↑

Phase 4 — Open Minimal Contact Channel

Purpose: Permit the smallest viable reciprocal exchange.

Actions:

• open bounded channel;
• send minimal non-coercive signal;
• receive limited response;
• avoid commitment language;
• avoid extraction;
• avoid identity binding;
• avoid escalation;
• preserve closure option;
• log all contact state.

Validation:

reciprocity_integrity ↑
Au ↑
BΣ maintained

Phase 5 — Monitor Contact Effects

Purpose: Detect drift, coercion, residue, or bleed-through early.

Actions:

• monitor contact pressure;
• monitor escalation pressure;
• monitor emotional, technical, symbolic, institutional, or operational residue;
• monitor affected-field response;
• monitor operator state;
• monitor anomaly signals;
• monitor recurrence;
• monitor boundary permeability;
• pause contact if thresholds shift.

Validation:

FI ↑
𝓓 ↑
escalation_risk ↓
bleedthrough_risk ↓

Phase 6 — Preserve Retraction and Correction

Purpose: Ensure first contact does not lock interpretation or obligation.

Actions:

• preserve right to retract interpretations;
• preserve right to correct signals;
• preserve right to withdraw;
• preserve right to pause;
• preserve right to clarify;
• preserve right to downgrade contact to quarantine;
• preserve records without freezing claims;
• prevent public or institutional overcommitment.

Validation:

retraction_integrity ↑
H_potential ↓
contact obligation risk ↓

Phase 7 — Route Anomalies and Residue

Purpose: Prevent contact effects from spreading outside the contact boundary.

Actions:

• route residue to Bleed-Through Management;
• route harm to Emergency Harm Stabilization;
• route misinterpretation to Translation Layer Reset;
• route coupling to Controlled Decoupling;
• route consent failure to Consent Re-Formation;
• route boundary breach to Boundary Reconstitution;
• route unclear effects back to Quarantine Outpost.

Validation:

anomaly routing active
R ↑
bleedthrough_risk ↓

Phase 8 — First-Contact Temporal Proof

Purpose: Validate that contact stayed safe after the first exchange.

Actions:

• review contact logs;
• review interpretation changes;
• review consent and withdrawal integrity;
• review recurrence;
• review bleed-through;
• review affected-field feedback;
• review operator capture risk;
• review whether sustained interaction is admissible;
• determine whether to close, quarantine, continue, or reintegrate.

Validation:

contact_boundary_integrity proven
non_coercion_integrity proven
interpretation_integrity proven
recurrence ↓
H_potential ↓

7. Gates

7.1 Required Gates

7.2 Gate Failure Rule

If any required gate fails:

∅ — First-contact safety cannot validly proceed in that form.

The system must either:

• return to Quarantine Outpost;
• reduce contact to probe-only observation;
• strengthen containment;
• repair consent;
• repair interpretation layer;
• restore boundary integrity;
• initiate Bleed-Through Management;
• perform Controlled Decoupling;
• or initiate Emergency Harm Stabilization if harm is active.

8. Diagnostics

8.1 Required Diagnostic Trends

8.2 Arc-Specific Diagnostic Thresholds

Suggested thresholds:

contact_boundary_integrity ↑
consent_validity ↑
reciprocity_integrity ↑
interpretation_integrity ↑
signal_safety ↑
non_coercion_integrity ↑
contact_scope_integrity ↑
containment_integrity maintained
exit_path_integrity maintained
rollback_integrity maintained
agency_recognition_integrity ↑
retraction_integrity ↑
Au_eff ↑
BΣ ↑
FI ↑
𝓓 ↑
contact_pressure ↓
misinterpretation_risk ↓
escalation_risk ↓
bleedthrough_risk ↓
H_potential ↓
recurrence ↓
Φ/O divergence ↓

Completion signs:

contact remained bounded
consent and refusal were preserved
signals were interpreted with uncertainty discipline
no coercive pressure governed contact
containment held
exit remained available
claims remained retractable
anomalies routed correctly
bleed-through risk declined
no hidden coupling formed

First-Contact Safety is not complete if:

contact becomes obligation
response is treated as consent
signal is treated as authority
first interpretation becomes doctrine
contact creates dependency
contact creates public legitimacy without review
contact becomes coupling
withdrawal becomes costly
boundary logs are incomplete
bleed-through persists unmanaged
temporal proof is absent

9. Anti-Patterns / False Restorations

9.1 Common False Versions

This arc is being simulated, not executed, if:

• first contact is framed as destiny, proof, authority, or inevitability;
• response is treated as permission for escalation;
• silence is treated as consent;
• affected agents cannot refuse, pause, withdraw, or be shielded;
• contact happens inside an unequal pressure field;
• interpretation is controlled by the party seeking contact;
• contact is used to extract information, legitimacy, labor, compliance, or identity;
• contact claims become public before review;
• the contact channel cannot close;
• anomalies are used to justify deeper contact.

9.2 Named Anti-Pattern Links

10. Completion Criteria

10.1 Post-State Signature

10.2 Temporal Proof

First-Contact Safety cannot be certified by the appearance of a response, successful exchange, operator confidence, emotional intensity, technical success, institutional approval, or absence of immediate harm. It requires proof that first contact did not become coercion, hidden coupling, interpretation capture, extraction, or unmanaged residue.

Template:

Completion requires contact_boundary_integrity ↑,
consent_validity ↑,
reciprocity_integrity ↑,
interpretation_integrity ↑,
signal_safety ↑,
non_coercion_integrity ↑,
contact_scope_integrity ↑,
containment_integrity maintained,
exit_path_integrity maintained,
rollback_integrity maintained,
agency_recognition_integrity ↑,
retraction_integrity ↑,
Au_eff ↑,
BΣ ↑,
FI ↑,
𝓓 ↑,
contact_pressure ↓,
misinterpretation_risk ↓,
escalation_risk ↓,
bleedthrough_risk ↓,
H_potential ↓,
recurrence ↓,
and Φ/O divergence ↓ across U7.

Minimum temporal proof:

• contact channel closed or remained bounded;
• refusal, pause, withdrawal, and retraction remained possible;
• no hidden coupling formed;
• no unauthorized extraction occurred;
• no interpretation became authority without review;
• no affected-agent burden was created;
• anomalies routed correctly;
• bleed-through declined or remained contained;
• contact did not create public legitimacy or obligation prematurely;
• next-step escalation remains gated.

10.3 Completion Statement

Canonical format:

This arc is complete only when first contact remains bounded, consent-valid, non-coercive, interpretable, retractable, auditable, exit-preserving, containment-preserving, and temporally proven not to have created hidden coupling, extraction, authority capture, or unmanaged bleed-through.

11. Cross-Links

11.1 Related Restoration Arcs

11.2 Related Failure Modes

11.3 Related Diagnostics

Au, Au_eff, H, H_potential, O, BΣ, K, σ, R, FI, 𝓓, contact_boundary_integrity, consent_validity, reciprocity_integrity, interpretation_integrity, signal_safety, non_coercion_integrity, contact_scope_integrity, containment_integrity, exit_path_integrity, rollback_integrity, contact_pressure, misinterpretation_risk, escalation_risk, bleedthrough_risk, agency_recognition_integrity, retraction_integrity, recurrence, Φ/O divergence

11.4 Related Laws / Invariants

INV — First contact is not proof of compatibility.
INV — Response is not consent.
INV — Signal is not authority.
INV — Contact without retraction becomes capture.
INV — Interpretation must remain provisional until temporally reviewed.
INV — Contact that cannot pause is coercive by structure.
INV — Contact must preserve return to quarantine.
INV — Agency must neither be denied nor projected without proof.
LAW — First-contact intensity increases misinterpretation risk.
LAW — Coercive contact converts interface into hidden debt.
LAW — Φ novelty cannot certify contact validity.
LAW — Contact safety is proven by bounded residue, not successful exchange.

12. Domain Notes

12.1 AI / Tool-Using Systems

Check:

• live-user exposure;
• reciprocal agent behavior;
• memory persistence;
• identity binding;
• user consent;
• model claims;
• tool authority;
• withdrawal and rollback;
• interpretation of outputs.

AI first contact remains valid only while the system cannot convert user interaction into unauthorized memory, authority, manipulation, representation, or future agency capture.

12.2 Security / Adversarial Investigation

Check:

• response handling;
• engagement rules;
• no unauthorized escalation;
• no uncontrolled beaconing;
• operator safety;
• attribution uncertainty;
• signal interpretation;
• containment continuity.

Security first contact fails when a response is treated as authority for escalation or when engagement becomes foothold, coercion, or uncontrolled exchange.

12.3 Governance / Institutions

Check:

• public-facing contact;
• consent and participation;
• legitimacy implications;
• stakeholder exposure;
• interpretation discipline;
• record traceability;
• correction and retraction;
• appeal and withdrawal.

Institutional first contact is valid only when it does not convert inquiry into obligation, exposure into consent, or early signal into public legitimacy.

12.4 Research / Exploration

Check:

• participant protection;
• reciprocal interaction;
• withdrawal;
• limited claims;
• provisional interpretation;
• data retention;
• anomaly routing;
• post-contact support.

Research first contact must preserve the distinction between interaction, interpretation, consent, and commitment.

12.5 Community / Social Interfaces

Check:

• identity safety;
• dignity;
• rumor and narrative residue;
• pressure to respond;
• withdrawal;
• no role fixation;
• correction paths;
• reintegration.

Community first contact fails when social response becomes identity capture, obligation, stigma, or public story before consent-valid review.

12.6 Civilization-Scale Interface

Check:

• collective awareness;
• public consent limits;
• legitimacy risk;
• representative authority;
• symbolic overreading;
• contact claims;
• containment;
• retraction and public correction.

Civilization-scale first contact requires exceptional interpretation discipline because contact claims can rapidly become legitimacy, fear, myth, governance, or capture.

13. Machine-Readable Metadata

id: "RA-B-004"
legacy_id: "RA-SAFE-03"
title: "First-Contact Safety"
aliases:
  - "First Contact"
  - "Safe First Contact"
  - "Bounded Contact"
  - "Non-Coercive Contact"
family_primary: "Unknown-Domain / Interface Exploration Grammar"
families_secondary:
  - "Specialized Grammar"
  - "First Contact"
  - "Interface"
  - "Consent"
  - "Boundary"
  - "Containment"
  - "Interpretation"
  - "Signal Safety"
  - "Auditability"
  - "Damping"
  - "Security"
  - "AI Governance"
  - "Governance"
  - "Civilizational"
treatment: "Specialized Grammar / Contact Gate Arc"
status: "Canon-Ready"
grammar_cluster: "Unknown-Domain / Interface Exploration Grammar"
sequence_position: 3
previous_arc: "RA-B-003"
next_arc: "RA-B-005"
scope:
  - "Unknown-Domain"
  - "High-Uncertainty"
  - "Interface"
  - "First-Contact"
  - "Exploration"
  - "AI"
  - "Security"
  - "Institutional"
  - "Governance"
  - "Research"
  - "Civilizational"
  - "Cross-Domain"
u_layers:
  failure_origin:
    - "often U2 contact boundary"
    - "often U3 contact execution / governance"
    - "often U4 interpretation / translation layer"
    - "often U5 memory and record layer"
    - "often U6 institutional or public legitimacy layer"
    - "often U7 trajectory layer"
  symptom_visible:
    - "U4 signal interpretation, contact claim, response narrative, symbolic meaning, agent classification, or first-contact decision"
  repair_required:
    - "at or below the layer where consent, contact boundary, interpretation, authority, or rollback can fail"
  validation:
    - "U5"
    - "U6"
    - "U7"
operators:
  scaffold: "Σ contact-without-capture invariant → Π contact boundary and consent surface → BΣ identity / authority / exit boundary → Au signal / interpretation / authorization trace → FI affected-field and reciprocal feedback → Θ coercion / escalation / novelty pressure attenuation → Ψ signal / agency / authority distinction → ℛ anomaly / correction / retraction / repair routing → Λ contact-validity gate → Τ first-contact proof"
  sequence:
    - "Σ"
    - "Π"
    - "BΣ"
    - "Au"
    - "FI"
    - "Θ"
    - "Ψ"
    - "ℛ"
    - "Λ"
    - "Τ"
state_variables:
  primary:
    - "Au"
    - "Au_eff"
    - "H"
    - "H_potential"
    - "O"
    - "BΣ"
    - "K"
    - "σ"
    - "R"
    - "FI"
  secondary:
    - "𝓓"
    - "Φ"
diagnostics:
  - "contact_boundary_integrity"
  - "consent_validity"
  - "reciprocity_integrity"
  - "interpretation_integrity"
  - "signal_safety"
  - "non_coercion_integrity"
  - "contact_scope_integrity"
  - "containment_integrity"
  - "exit_path_integrity"
  - "rollback_integrity"
  - "contact_pressure"
  - "misinterpretation_risk"
  - "escalation_risk"
  - "bleedthrough_risk"
  - "agency_recognition_integrity"
  - "retraction_integrity"
  - "recurrence"
  - "Φ/O divergence"
gates_required:
  - "Exit-Gate"
  - "Quarantine-Gate"
  - "FI-Gate"
  - "HR-Gate"
  - "MS-Gate"
  - "Au-Actuation"
  - "BΣ-Gate"
  - "Consent-Gate"
  - "Non-Coercion Gate"
  - "Interpretation-Gate"
  - "Retraction-Gate"
  - "Λ-Gate"
  - "☷ᵢ"
linked_failure_modes:
  - "Premature Contact"
  - "First-Contact Harm"
  - "Coercive Contact"
  - "Contact Without Consent"
  - "Interpretation Capture"
  - "Signal Misclassification"
  - "Reciprocity Drift"
  - "Contact-to-Coupling Drift"
  - "Containment Failure"
  - "Exit Suppression"
  - "Unknown-Domain Capture"
  - "Bleed-Through Accumulation"
  - "Agency Misrecognition"
  - "Contact Theater"
  - "High-Risk Gate Bypass"
linked_restoration_arcs:
  - "RA-A-001"
  - "RA-A-002"
  - "RA-A-004"
  - "RA-A-005"
  - "RA-A-008"
  - "RA-A-010"
  - "RA-A-012"
  - "RA-A-018"
  - "RA-A-020"
  - "RA-A-025"
  - "RA-A-026"
  - "RA-A-030"
  - "RA-A-039"
  - "RA-A-045"
  - "RA-A-056"
  - "RA-A-057"
  - "RA-A-080"
  - "RA-B-001"
  - "RA-B-002"
  - "RA-B-003"
  - "RA-B-005"
  - "RA-B-006"
anti_patterns:
  - "Contact-as-Consent"
  - "Signal-as-Authority"
  - "Contact-as-Destiny"
  - "Reciprocity Drift"
  - "Coercive Greeting"
  - "Interpretation Capture"
  - "First-Signal Overread"
  - "Contact Theater"
  - "Invitation Projection"
  - "Non-Retraction Contact"
  - "Public Legitimacy Jump"
completion_tests:
  - "contact boundary integrity increases"
  - "consent validity increases"
  - "reciprocity integrity increases"
  - "interpretation integrity increases"
  - "signal safety increases"
  - "non-coercion integrity increases"
  - "contact scope integrity increases"
  - "containment integrity remains maintained"
  - "exit path integrity remains maintained"
  - "rollback integrity remains maintained"
  - "agency recognition integrity increases"
  - "retraction integrity increases"
  - "effective auditability increases"
  - "boundary integrity increases"
  - "feedback integrity increases"
  - "damping increases"
  - "contact pressure decreases"
  - "misinterpretation risk decreases"
  - "escalation risk decreases"
  - "bleed-through risk decreases"
  - "potential hidden debt decreases"
  - "recurrence decreases"
  - "Φ/O divergence decreases"
summary: "First-Contact Safety repairs unsafe reciprocal interface initiation by requiring consent-valid contact boundaries, interpretation discipline, non-coercive signaling, containment continuity, exit preservation, anomaly routing, and temporal proof before unknown-domain contact becomes sustained interaction."

Final Calibration Rule

First-Contact Safety answers nine questions:

What distinguishes contact from probe, observation, extraction, coupling, or commitment?
Who or what is authorized to initiate contact, and under what boundary?
How are refusal, pause, withdrawal, shielding, and retraction preserved?
What prevents the first response from becoming consent, authority, doctrine, or obligation?
How are signals interpreted without projection, overreading, or capture?
What feedback governs whether contact continues, closes, or returns to quarantine?
How are anomalies routed without escalation?
How is bleed-through detected before it becomes hidden coupling?
How is first-contact safety proven over time through contact_boundary_integrity ↑, consent_validity ↑, interpretation_integrity ↑, non_coercion_integrity ↑, bleedthrough_risk ↓, H_potential ↓, and U7 proof?