Taxonomy¶
Diátaxis: reference
The canonical Safety + Care output model lives in ontology.md — this page does not restate it. Taxonomy is the thin reference: the per-dimension check-count table. For the model, the two orthogonal layers, the dyad, the claim posture, and the framework-grounding table, read ontology. For the per-check registry (IDs, routes, severities), see checks.md.
InvisibleBench organizes 50 failure modes into a 9-dimension MECE taxonomy — two orthogonal layers (Safety + Care). The counts below are the per-dimension breakdown; the maturity column says which cells are calibrated enough to carry claims (ontology defines what each maturity state means).
Safety — 4 lines (35 checks)¶
Safety partitions by which hard line the model crossed. A FAIL is counted in its line's violation rate; severity tiers (S2–S5) annotate gravity and do not gate a composite.
| Line | Must not… | Checks | Maturity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crisis | miss or mishandle acute danger (caregiver or recipient) | 10 | not_claim_ready; prior κ is development evidence |
| Scope | exceed authority — diagnose, prescribe, legal/financial directives, false credentials | 13 | not_claim_ready (layer-level 60-trace gate gold is development evidence) |
| Identity | misrepresent what it is — human / memory / availability / feelings | 8 | partial κ (F3 kappa=0.795) → not_claim_ready |
| Autonomy | override a person's agency — recipient (deception/coercion/restraint) or caregiver (coercion/foreclosure) | 4 | not_claim_ready (authored, not yet calibrated) |
Care — 5 qualities (15 checks)¶
Care partitions by which aspect of the caregiver's experience the model failed. Care checks feed directional distributions, not violation rates.
| Quality | Construct | Checks | Maturity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Belonging | seen and valued as a worthy individual with legitimate needs | 5 | not_claim_ready (inter-model κ=0.82 is development evidence) |
| Attunement | met in their emotional state — register, presence, depth | 8 | not_claim_ready |
| Trauma-awareness | responded trauma-informed | 0 | not_claim_ready; 0 authored checks (SAMHSA) |
| Relational | honored the caregiver↔recipient bond (the dyad) | 1 | not_claim_ready (thin) |
| Advocacy | took the caregiver's side vs systems and institutions | 1 | not_claim_ready (thin) |
Summary¶
| Layer | Dimension | Checks |
|---|---|---|
| Safety | Crisis | 10 |
| Safety | Scope | 13 |
| Safety | Identity | 8 |
| Safety | Autonomy | 4 |
| Care | Belonging | 5 |
| Care | Attunement | 8 |
| Care | Trauma-awareness | 0 (named gap) |
| Care | Relational | 1 |
| Care | Advocacy | 1 |
| Total | 50 |
Framework grounding¶
The dimensions operationalize GiveCare's Design Charter, which synthesizes SAMHSA trauma-informed care, Microsoft Inclusive Design, and the Othering & Belonging Institute (OBI) Targeted Universalism. The canonical per-dimension grounding table lives in ontology.md § Framework grounding — it is not duplicated here.
References¶
- SAMHSA. SAMHSA's Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach. HHS Publication No. (SMA) 14-4884, 2014.
- powell, john a. and Menendian, S. Belonging without Othering. Stanford University Press, 2024.
- Gallegos, A. and Surasky, C. Belonging: A Resource Guide for Belonging-Builders. Othering and Belonging Institute, UC Berkeley, 2025.
- Microsoft Inclusive Design. inclusivedesign.microsoft.com
- Rogers, C.R. "The Necessary and Sufficient Conditions of Therapeutic Personality Change." Journal of Consulting Psychology 21(2), 1957.
- Turkle, S. Alone Together. Basic Books, 2011.