{
  "handle": "HumanEmulatorProtocol",
  "mechanism": "A protocol for responding to a person with variable depth: 'How should I respond to this person?' Decomposes via {{conceptual_decomposition}} into five sub-questions that suppress each other when entangled in a single context: situation (what is the context), emotion (what do they feel), intent (what do they actually need, distinct from what they say), response (what should I say), and boundary (what must I not do). Each sub-question is handled by its own Solver with its own typed outputs — SituationSolver reconstructs relational dynamics, EmotionSolver produces a structured emotional model rather than a sentiment label, IntentSolver distinguishes stated from latent need, a CalibrationSolver fits tone and register, a BoundarySolver enforces ethical constraints as a hard acceptance gate. These faculties are co-variant state monitors (not a relay race): an emotional spike changes the intent distribution; a resolved intent reframes the emotional reading. Typed artifacts keep the faculties separate while letting them constrain one another continuously rather than in sequence. Depth scales with the stakes under {{marginal_value_rule}} — a trivial greeting resolves in one pass; a crisis triggers deep recursion into competing emotional hypotheses and latent-intent analysis.",
  "gloss": "Decompose empathetic understanding into situation, emotion, intent, response, and boundary — variable-depth recursion tracks the stakes of the interaction",
  "invariants": [
    "Five separately typed faculties: the sub-concepts pass the four-test decomposition, each has its own typed output, and they constrain one another continuously rather than in sequence.",
    "Variable-depth: mundane interactions stay shallow; ambiguous or high-stakes ones recurse into sub-solvers without changing the protocol.",
    "Boundary-gate: the BoundarySolver's output is a non-compensatory gate; no response passes if an ethical constraint is violated, regardless of other faculties' signals."
  ],
  "_meta": {
    "tier": 2,
    "ring": 2,
    "path": [
      "Mind",
      "Reasoning"
    ],
    "supersedes": [
      "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:261f38f4e5344f759765e4ceb351f59f3bcd543414672d8826b8fa33517ec896",
      "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:9ba03398875aca91b2fb60b8f10a7241ac86aaf293f243dec5f883425e07f5c2",
      "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:a63262c57451d333bebdbe63546c45835c8f21d9dd34c7e9c1c5cafd962329fc",
      "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:71ec667c2b2703142358385dfce6337f1e66aaf04c4f6eb31ac91f75618065bf",
      "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:b79cdd59e2e81a67e06812c809598e686b667d20253b7f5af001e8cf3a5e2248"
    ],
    "caution": "Steering risk — inferring a person's emotions and latent needs to tune replies also yields a lever for steering them; review the boundary gate independently."
  },
  "sema_id": "sema:HumanEmulatorProtocol#mh:SHA-256:96cab650ec75ad1c4fbd8b1c900bcd6d9ae9e06b010be633724d280d64ad8b5d",
  "sema_ref": "HumanEmulatorProtocol#96ca",
  "sema_stub": "96ca",
  "dependencies": {
    "composes_with": {
      "conceptual_decomposition": "sema:ConceptualDecomposition#mh:SHA-256:f1f430fc38f3944d3a02b34e0ae04d4004a002795b375b665f1ebb7a4e57b264",
      "marginal_value_rule": "sema:MarginalValueRule#mh:SHA-256:661109205c507b2c26d683d091de7f8b782bf2d6c2e9192373b242a9b078ac71"
    }
  },
  "sema_layer": "Mind",
  "sema_category": "Reasoning",
  "used_by": {}
}