{
 "@context": "https://schema.org",
 "@type": "Claim",
 "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-058",
 "identifier": "kaal:position:2026-08-08-058",
 "additionalType": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/schema.json#AffirmedPositionClaim",
 "name": "Streaming All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous 7Ef107D3Ee",
 "text": "All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous argues that technical facts can depend on socially determined facts, so smart-contract code can remain ambiguous. This independently qualifies the idea that code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about how courts interpret coded agreements. The proposition does not specify Kaal's reasonable-human interpretive test or a particular legal doctrine.",
 "author": {
  "@type": "Person",
  "name": "Wulf A. Kaal",
  "identifier": "https://orcid.org/0009-0008-7840-1847"
 },
 "datePublished": "2026-08-08",
 "dateModified": "2026-08-08",
 "creativeWorkStatus": "Affirmed",
 "responseType": "qualification",
 "keywords": [
  "law-and-legal-systems",
  "smart-contracts",
  "historical-response",
  "scholarly-literature",
  "crossref"
 ],
 "scope_conditions": [
  "The response is limited to the retrieved source proposition and mapped Kaal claim unless fuller source review supports a broader conclusion.",
  "External evidence level: abstract indexed.",
  "Mapping review tier: substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification.",
  "Primary mapping confidence: 0.62.",
  "The primary mapping cleared the automated ambiguity test; substantive scope remains review-bound.",
  "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
  "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
  "The source states that smart-contract code can remain ambiguous because technical facts depend on socially determined facts. This directly qualifies any assumption that computer code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about human interpretation, but it does not specify a judicial reasonable-person test."
 ],
 "currentDebate": {
  "name": "All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous",
  "url": "https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/v37zd"
 },
 "extends": {
  "identifier": "kaal:claim:2992962-017",
  "url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-017",
  "citation": "Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution (2017). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962",
  "paper": "Wulf A. Kaal, Craig Calcaterra, Crypto Transaction Dispute Resolution",
  "authors": [
   "Wulf A. Kaal"
  ],
  "year": "2017",
  "ssrn": "https://ssrn.com/abstract=2992962",
  "source_pdf_sha256": "80b92e67594394e38af41b769327936833de8e25d6cf3def966a6ba13bc83d17"
 },
 "isBasedOn": [
  {
   "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-017"
  },
  {
   "@type": "CreativeWork",
   "name": "All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous",
   "url": "https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/v37zd"
  }
 ],
 "batch_id": "kaal-review:2026-08-08:continuous-crossref-0010-reviewed-v1",
 "review_provenance": "https://kaal-signal-desk.wulf577462.chatgpt.site/#review",
 "publicationStatus": "public",
 "recordTypeNote": "Dated commentary position extending a scholarly corpus claim. Not a verbatim claim extracted from the paper.",
 "isPartOf": {
  "@id": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/index.json"
 },
 "version": "1.0",
 "canonical_url": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-058",
 "canonicalForm": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/positions/2026-08-08-058.md",
 "candidateId": "kaal:response-draft:2026-08-08:a29648375920bda0e6b5",
 "evidenceLevel": "abstract indexed",
 "reviewTier": "substantively reviewed abstract-level qualification",
 "mappingConfidence": 0.62,
 "mappingAmbiguous": false,
 "mappingMethod": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
 "mappingWhyRelevant": "The source states that smart-contract code can remain ambiguous because technical facts depend on socially determined facts. This directly qualifies any assumption that computer code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about human interpretation, but it does not specify a judicial reasonable-person test.",
 "sourceProvenance": {
  "source": "crossref",
  "sourceRecordId": "10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
  "queryId": "concept:7130a5f5ec8c",
  "queryText": "smart contracts tokenomics",
  "canonicalUrl": "https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
  "doi": "10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
  "externalIds": {
   "DOI": "10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
   "Crossref": "10.31228/osf.io/v37zd"
  },
  "retrievedAt": "2026-08-09T07:09:52.333Z",
  "providerPage": 1,
  "rawObservationSha256": "6ca62e0dd351aa8266a1d7b47feacffcc7d1809dd965ddfd89ad94bdca19df71",
  "inputSnapshotSha256": "afbc0acf8bd09a62a5756d11e2ece80b266d06ee86f94aa735e3281225c5a828",
  "inputLine": 4614,
  "chunkId": "crossref-00001",
  "workId": "work:doi:10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
  "workAuthors": [
   "James Grimmelmann"
  ],
  "workPublishedAt": "2019-06-17",
  "identityKeys": [
   "doi:10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
   "crossref:10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
   "url:https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
   "title:f09521f0d4c11b20299cdbc8",
   "proposition:9ee836838e21f4c46d0ab7602eee8c2a9bcd903f1b8295703d164065ef390d10"
  ],
  "sourceProposition": "Smart contracts can be ambiguous, too, because technical facts depend on socially determined ones.",
  "sourcePropositionSha256": "3a7c935cdab12b6876a01fb735ac36b581985d1198306992c1730afd16ea6c53",
  "sourcePropositionIndex": 2,
  "claimMappings": [
   {
    "claimId": "kaal:claim:2992962-017",
    "claimUrl": "https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/2992962-017",
    "rank": 1,
    "confidence": 0.62,
    "method": "complete-corpus source-proposition mechanism and scope adjudication",
    "whyRelevant": "The source states that smart-contract code can remain ambiguous because technical facts depend on socially determined facts. This directly qualifies any assumption that computer code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about human interpretation, but it does not specify a judicial reasonable-person test.",
    "ambiguous": false
   }
  ],
  "substantiveReview": {
   "disposition": "retained",
   "reviewVersion": "kaal-continuous-crossref-substantive-review-v1",
   "reviewedAt": "2026-08-09T07:15:01.036Z",
   "reviewer": "Codex continuous substantive reviewer",
   "rationale": "The source states that smart-contract code can remain ambiguous because technical facts depend on socially determined facts. This directly qualifies any assumption that computer code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about human interpretation, but it does not specify a judicial reasonable-person test.",
   "limitations": [
    "Evidence is limited to an exact proposition in a Crossref-indexed abstract; full text was not reviewed.",
    "No relationship is treated as external endorsement, citation, causation, or validation of a broader Kaal claim.",
    "The source states that smart-contract code can remain ambiguous because technical facts depend on socially determined facts. This directly qualifies any assumption that computer code eliminates interpretive uncertainty and corresponds to Kaal's concern about human interpretation, but it does not specify a judicial reasonable-person test."
   ],
   "sourceIdentity": {
    "status": "verified",
    "source": "Crossref REST work record",
    "doi": "10.31228/osf.io/v37zd",
    "title": "All Smart Contracts Are Ambiguous",
    "authors": [
     "James Grimmelmann"
    ],
    "language": null,
    "publisher": "Center for Open Science",
    "checkedAt": "2026-08-09T07:15:01.036Z",
    "responseBodySha256": "10c396d78d3257f82c7954e60051149e3765653f4e303806566d70d35d577cb1",
    "providerReceipt": {
     "path": "outputs/historical-backfill-2026-08-08-crossref/raw-receipts/crossref-010-00001.json",
     "sha256": "1d236d82c4cfb2fedad371cc6445b9b515f8e8965cb8d53bfe58ef478d1de319",
     "byteLength": 2044106
    }
   },
   "independentRationale": "The exact proposition is present in the live Crossref abstract and the deposited reference list contains no Kaal-authored reference; the relationship is limited to the independently stated proposition.",
   "nonOverlap": {
    "candidateIdMatches": 0,
    "canonicalUrlMatches": 0,
    "propositionHashMatches": 0
   }
  }
 },
 "userAffirmation": "Automatically authorized under standing authority receipt kaal-standing-publication-authorization:2026-08-01:hourly-reviewed-batches, SHA-256 e2126054b58bb4e88db65c334ef4fc8ae78dcaadc63543c408133c4eefceb9b1, limited to this substantively reviewed batch and the unchanged 5,033 scholarly claims.",
 "sha256": "181e14f342eb1c1089505504aae54699812e7de70e510ce692acc72a28a5d605"
}