Relationship ontology / Contextual reference
Type 39 of 39
Indicator contextual reference
Connects a canonical indicator to explicitly declared legal guidance or research literature used only to explain its interpretive context.
- Declared edges
- 2
- <0.1% of graph
- Profile nodes
- 4
- distinct endpoints
- Family contracts
- 1
- endpoint pairings
- Source custody
- 100.0%
- 2 links
- Label variants
- 2
- encoded evidence labels
This edge recordsConnects a canonical indicator to explicitly declared legal guidance or research literature used only to explain its interpretive context.
This edge does not establishIt does not supply observations, validate encoded values, establish a relevant market, create a legal presumption, or make unlike research measures comparable.
Canonical contract
Read the edge before reading the network
The type definition is stable across every edge in this dossier.- Semantic category
- Contextual reference
- Declared legal guidance and research literature that contextualize a measure without supplying observations.
- Declared layer
- Research
- Topic, question, and issue scope, publication routes, source custody, and contextual references
- Direction
- Canonical indicator to contextual public reference
- Direction describes the encoded record, not economic influence.
- Evidence basis
- A reviewed indicator-reference declaration with a registered source identifier, stated relevance, and explicit non-custody boundary.
- Edge-specific evidence remains visible in the ledger below.
Type composition
Where this semantic contract appears
Family routes, evidence labels, confidence, and custody remain separate dimensions.Endpoint structure
Published edge wording
- Contextual research literature50.0% of type1
- Legal framework reference50.0% of type1
Declared confidence labels
- Bounded100.0% of type2
100.0%2 of 2 edges carry direct source custody
Endpoint incidence
Profiles carrying this relationship type
Counts describe incident edges only. They do not rank economic importance or influence.Most frequent from-endpoints
Most frequent to-endpoints
Source custody
Evidence routes attached to this type
Source counts describe direct custody encoded on these edges.2source routes100.0% edge coverage
Exact edge register
Inspect every encoded instance
Search retains the canonical type while matching endpoint labels, evidence wording, source IDs, and edge details.2matching edgespage 1 of 1
| From profile | Encoded relationship | To profile | Evidence custody |
|---|---|---|---|
| Detailed industry HHIindicator | Contextual research literatureThe peer-reviewed article studies changes in U.S. industry concentration since the late 1990s. It motivates longitudinal scrutiny of industry structure but supplies none of this indicator's 2022 Economic Census rows. Boundary: The paper's firm universe, measures, time window, and research design differ from the current Census industry-HHI contract. Its results are not joined to, pooled with, or used to validate these observations.indicator-reference:industry-hhi-glm-2019 | Are US Industries Becoming More Concentrated?source | boundedGrullon, Larkin, and Michaely / Review of Finance (2019)Source dossier |
| Tracked market HHIindicator | Legal framework referenceThe joint agency guidance describes factors and frameworks the agencies often use when reviewing mergers and acquisitions. It explains why HHI can matter in a merger screen but supplies none of this indicator's market observations. Boundary: The Guidelines are non-binding, and individual matters turn on applicable law and facts. An Antitrust Radar market-HHI row does not establish a relevant market, a structural presumption, liability, or likely competitive effects.indicator-reference:market-hhi-2023-merger-guidelines | 2023 Merger Guidelinessource | boundedDOJ and FTC / 2023 Merger GuidelinesSource dossier |
Complete type packet