Binary-Origami Figuration is the conceptual framework behind bofig. This page explains what the name means and why it matters.
Think of evidence like a flat sheet of paper. On its own, it’s just data—claims, sources, relationships, scores. But depending on who’s looking and what they need, that same sheet can be folded into completely different shapes.
| Component | Meaning | Example |
|---|---|---|
Binary |
The clear, discrete relationships in evidence (supports/contradicts/contextualizes) and the 0-100 scores that make epistemology measurable |
A claim has a PROMPT score of 85. An evidence item either supports or contradicts. No ambiguity. |
Origami |
The art of folding evidence into different shapes for different audiences—without losing the original structure |
A researcher sees methodology first. A policymaker sees recommendations. Same evidence, different "folds." |
Figuration |
The process of structuring information so it can be unfolded and refolded for clarity, reversibility, and interoperability |
Navigation paths that let any user trace back to primary sources |
Just like you can unfold origami back to a flat sheet, users can always trace back to the original evidence. No information is lost in the folding.
RESEARCHER VIEW FLAT EVIDENCE POLICYMAKER VIEW
/\ +--------+ /\
/ \ ←—— unfold —— | Claims | ——— fold ———→ / \
/____\ | Sources| / \
↑ | Scores | ↑
methodology-first +--------+ authority-firstThe same evidence can be "folded" into formats for:
-
Zotero reference managers
-
GraphQL APIs
-
JSON-LD for semantic web
-
D3.js visualizations
Different audiences need different entry points to the same truth:
| Audience | Their "Fold" |
|---|---|
Researcher |
Evidence-first, methodology priority, replicability emphasized |
Policymaker |
Authoritative sources, recommendations, publication venue |
Affected Person |
Personal impact, clarity, transparency |
Skeptic |
Counter-evidence surfaced, methodology scrutinized |
Journalist |
Provenance chains, source verification, PROMPT scores visible |
We didn’t fall from Truth to Post-Truth; we evolved to complex epistemology without building infrastructure. This system IS that infrastructure.
Binary-Origami Figuration addresses a fundamental problem: how do we coordinate without consensus?
In investigative journalism, activists, policymakers, researchers, and affected communities rarely agree on what evidence means. But they can all work with the same evidence if it’s structured to support their different perspectives.
-
Same data, multiple views: The evidence graph is one structure. Navigation paths create different "folds."
-
Measurable epistemology: PROMPT scores make quality explicit, not implicit.
-
Navigation over narration: Users choose their path through evidence, not the author.
-
Reversibility: Every fold can be unfolded. Every path can be retraced.
THE FLAT SHEET (Raw Evidence)
╔════════════════════════════════════════╗
║ ONS Data ║ Interview ║ Study X ║
║ Report Y ║ ThinkTank ║ BoE Stats ║
╚════════════════════════════════════════╝
↓ FOLD
THE RESEARCHER'S CRANE (Methodology-First)
/\
/ \
/____\
/_/\__\_\
‖
Peer-reviewed first,
interviews last
THE POLICYMAKER'S BOX (Authority-First)
┌───────┐
│ ONS │
│ BoE │
└───────┘
Official sources first,
think tanks secondThe test dataset includes 7 claims and 30 evidence items about UK inflation.
| Claim | "Energy price cap increases drove inflation higher than headline CPI" |
|---|---|
Supporting Evidence |
ONS CPI data, Ofgem price cap announcements |
Contradicting Evidence |
BoE analysis showing food prices as primary driver |
Contextualizing Evidence |
Resolution Foundation reports on distributional impact |
Three folds of the same evidence:
-
Researcher Path: Starts with methodology (how was CPI calculated?), leads to source data, ends with interpretation conflicts
-
Policymaker Path: Starts with official sources (ONS, BoE), leads to actionable findings, ends with policy recommendations
-
Affected Person Path: Starts with personal impact (how much more am I paying?), leads to causes, ends with systemic explanations
-
i-docs Navigation — The "choose your own adventure" principle
-
PROMPT Scoring — The "nutrition labels" for evidence quality
-
Boundary Objects — The theory behind multi-perspective design
-
Evidence Graphs — The skeleton beneath the origami
-
Folding 101 — Step-by-step tutorial
-
Why not just use a wiki or CMS?
Wikis and CMSs don’t have built-in epistemological scoring, audience-specific navigation, or formal reversibility. They store content; bofig structures evidence relationships.
-
Is this just a graph database with extra steps?
No. Graph databases store relationships. Bofig adds: (1) PROMPT scoring for measurable quality, (2) boundary object paths for multi-stakeholder coordination, (3) reversible folding patterns for different audiences.
-
What does "figuration" add to "binary-origami"?
Figuration is the process of structuring. It implies intentional design, not just storage. The system doesn’t just hold data—it shapes how that data can be understood across contexts.
-
Star, S.L. & Griesemer, J.R. (1989). "Institutional Ecology, 'Translations' and Boundary Objects"
-
MIT Open Doc Lab: i-docs Principles
-
The PROMPT Framework: See PROMPT Scoring
Last Updated: 2025-01