Technical overview
KEE and KnoEdg.NYC
KEE—Knowledge, Epistemics & Eidos—is the framework behind how KnoEdg.NYC organizes knowledge from different sources.
The problem
Sources can make different claims about the same subject. They may use different names or identifiers, reflect different points in time, carry different levels of authority, or later be corrected or replaced. Combining them without retaining those differences can create a misleading single account.
The approach
KEE treats provenance, context, time and change as part of the knowledge rather than as incidental notes. It supports representing assertions and their sources, attributed people or organizations, confidence, disagreement, correction, supersession and lifecycle state.
This does not make every source equally authoritative. It preserves enough context for a person—or another system—to understand why information is present and how it relates to other information.
How KnoEdg.NYC applies it
The NYC knowledge work is developed separately from this public website. Source-backed material is reviewed and structured using KEE before selected information is prepared for public presentation here. Rights and redistribution conditions remain part of that review.
The public site is a projection of that work, not the canonical evidence store. It is designed to make connected knowledge approachable while retaining links to the context needed to interpret it responsibly.
Current status
Both KEE and its application to New York City are under active development. This overview describes the working architecture; detailed public specifications and data-backed views will be introduced progressively.
What KEE means
Knowledge ↑
The claims, relationships and context being represented—not merely isolated facts.
Epistemics ↑
How knowledge is known and qualified: its sources, evidence, authority, confidence, disagreements and changes over time.
Eidos ↑
KEE’s developing entity-and-agency layer. It addresses concerns such as identity, continuity, agency, delegation, authority and responsibility by composing established approaches rather than defining a universal model of its own.