{
  "authors": [
    {
      "name": "Masters Consulting Group",
      "url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/"
    }
  ],
  "description": "Dated, attributable public records of Masters research results, comparisons, prior-art reviews, negative results and architecture decisions.",
  "feed_url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/research/findings/feed.json",
  "home_page_url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/research/findings/",
  "items": [
    {
      "_masters": {
        "confidence": "provisional",
        "finding_id": "MCG-F-0003",
        "is_current": true,
        "kind": "finding",
        "status": "published",
        "truth_boundary": "This is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample."
      },
      "authors": [
        {
          "name": "Joseph Walker"
        }
      ],
      "content_text": "The four open-source retrieval libraries examined here disagree about what a chunk is called, what its name is a function of, and whether it survives a rebuild. None offers a cross-runtime identity contract — so a corpus expected to outlive its retrieval stack has to own that contract itself.\n\nThis is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample.",
      "date_published": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z",
      "id": "MCG-F-0003",
      "summary": "The four open-source retrieval libraries examined here disagree about what a chunk is called, what its name is a function of, and whether it survives a rebuild. None offers a cross-runtime identity contract — so a corpus expected to outlive its retrieval stack has to own that contract itself.",
      "tags": [
        "retrieval",
        "chunk identity",
        "provenance",
        "content addressing",
        "build versus reuse"
      ],
      "title": "Chunk identity across four retrieval libraries: four different answers, and no shared contract to inherit",
      "url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/research/findings/chunk-identity-in-rag-ready-publication-corpora/"
    },
    {
      "_masters": {
        "confidence": "provisional",
        "finding_id": "MCG-F-0002",
        "is_current": true,
        "kind": "finding",
        "status": "published",
        "truth_boundary": "This is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample."
      },
      "authors": [
        {
          "name": "Joseph Walker"
        }
      ],
      "content_text": "Both candidate editors represent the Masters publication contract faithfully and lose nothing in a round trip. Only one produces a pull request automatically — but only the other can hold a credential scoped to a single repository, and the branch protection the first one depends on is not available on this repository at all.\n\nThis is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample.",
      "date_published": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z",
      "id": "MCG-F-0002",
      "summary": "Both candidate editors represent the Masters publication contract faithfully and lose nothing in a round trip. Only one produces a pull request automatically — but only the other can hold a credential scoped to a single repository, and the branch protection the first one depends on is not available on this repository at all.",
      "tags": [
        "authoring",
        "content management",
        "publication authority",
        "Git-native tooling",
        "build versus reuse"
      ],
      "title": "A Git-native browser editor for Masters Findings: one candidate wins the workflow, the other wins the credential",
      "url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/research/findings/git-native-editor-backend-for-masters-findings/"
    },
    {
      "_masters": {
        "confidence": "provisional",
        "finding_id": "MCG-F-0001",
        "is_current": true,
        "kind": "finding",
        "status": "published",
        "truth_boundary": "This is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample."
      },
      "authors": [
        {
          "name": "Joseph Walker"
        }
      ],
      "content_text": "A prior-art review of the software, standards and architectures that overlap the systems Masters has not yet built. Nearly every commodity layer already exists and should be reused. No reviewed system reproduces the institutional loop those layers would sit inside.\n\nThis is a provisional Finding. The result held under the stated method and scope, and has not yet been repeated or tested against a wider sample.",
      "date_published": "2026-09-05T00:00:00Z",
      "id": "MCG-F-0001",
      "summary": "A prior-art review of the software, standards and architectures that overlap the systems Masters has not yet built. Nearly every commodity layer already exists and should be reused. No reviewed system reproduces the institutional loop those layers would sit inside.",
      "tags": [
        "prior art",
        "build versus reuse",
        "institutional architecture",
        "provenance",
        "open source"
      ],
      "title": "Mature open-source prior art covers most of the remaining Masters roadmap — and none of its operating loop",
      "url": "https://mastersconsultinggroup.org/research/findings/open-source-prior-art-for-remaining-masters-systems/"
    }
  ],
  "language": "en",
  "title": "Masters Consulting Group — Findings",
  "version": "https://jsonfeed.org/version/1.1"
}