Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Design study specifies an auditable carbon accounting architecture in emissions reporting, indicating that historical states remain reconstructable despite factor updates or policy shifts.
This working paper specifies an architecture that treats carbon accounting information as an auditable information state: a version-bound representation for a defined period, boundary and purpose that remains reconstructable after later corrections. Building on carbon-ledger, provenance and internal-control research, it connects calculation entries with bound factor versions and recipes, closed reporting states, typed evidence assessments, versioned qualitative assertions and recipient-specific response packages. Three design propositions and eight invariants specify historical reconstruction, preserved communication and impact review, including changes in evidence or permitted use without numerical change. A synthetic seven-entry example shows a supplier factor correction that raises a customer-selected product-related result from 450 to 490 kg CO2e per batch while a bank-selected Scope 1/2 sum remains at 1,450 kg CO2e; counterexamples cover evidence withdrawal, boundary change, policy-scope failure and uncertain transmission. An edition-bound mapping to the EU VSME standard separates unit conversion from disclosure coverage. No implementation or empirical evaluation is reported; a falsifiable comparison against a configured versioned-repository baseline is proposed as the next test.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dennis Himmelmann (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: