Nexus Ontology
This is a good moment to freeze the ontologies, because you now have enough clarity to separate three layers:
- Nexus Universal Ontology (domain-agnostic primitives)
- Adam’s Event Modeling Ontology (method primitives)
- Event Modeling Extended (EMext) (your explicit implementation ontology)
Each serves a different purpose.
1. Nexus Ontology (Universal Truth Graph)
This is the highest abstraction layer.
It must work for:
- software systems
- education
- video production
- knowledge graphs
- physical processes
So the primitives should be domain-agnostic.
Behavioral primitives
Agent
Intent
Fact
Interpretation
Meaning:
Agent
entity capable of action or decision
Intent
a proposed action
Fact
something that happened
Interpretation
derived understanding of facts
Behavior loop:
Agent
↓
Intent
↓
Fact
↓
Interpretation
↓
Agent
Structural primitives
Concept
Context
Meaning:
Concept
vocabulary element / semantic unit
Context
boundary in which concepts are meaningful
Nexus Ontology Summary
Agent
Intent
Fact
Interpretation
Concept
Context
These are truth graph primitives.
Everything else is derived.
2. Adam’s Event Modeling Ontology
Event Modeling is a modeling method, not a universal ontology.
Core primitives used by Adam Dymitruk:
Actor
Command
Event
View
Slice
Timeline
Meaning:
Actor
human or external system interacting with system
Command
request for something to happen
Event
fact that something happened
View
filtered dataset derived from events
Slice
minimal behavior unit (Command→Event or Event→View)
Timeline
ordered sequence of slices
Automation concept:
Processor / Bot
Used when:
Event → View → Processor → Command
Event Modeling Ontology Summary
Actor
Command
Event
View
Slice
Timeline
Processor (optional)
This ontology is intentionally minimal for discovery workshops.
Implementation details are hidden.
3. Event Modeling Expanded (EMExt)
This is where you expose the hidden mechanisms.
EMExt makes the implicit parts explicit.
Core behavioral primitives
Agent
Trigger
Command
Handler
Event
Projection
View
Meaning:
Agent
entity capable of triggering actions
Trigger
mechanism that initiates a command
Command
requested action
Handler
implementation that evaluates command
Event
fact produced by handler
Projection
mechanism deriving data from events
View
dataset derived from projections
Pipeline becomes:
Agent
↓
Trigger
↓
Command
↓
Handler
↓
Event
↓
Projection
↓
View
Automation becomes:
Event
↓
Projection
↓
View
↓
Bot Trigger
↓
Command
Rule layer (GWT)
EMExt explicitly models rule definitions.
Command slice rule:
GIVEN <events>
WHEN <command>
THEN <event>
Projection rule:
GIVEN <events>
WHEN <filter>
THEN <view>
4. How the three ontologies align
| Nexus | Event Modeling | EMExt |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | Actor | Agent |
| Intent | Command | Command |
| Fact | Event | Event |
| Interpretation | View | View |
| — | — | Projection |
| — | — | Handler |
| — | — | Trigger |
| Concept | — | Concept |
| Context | — | Context |
5. The important pattern
You can see the layering:
Nexus
conceptual truth primitives
Event Modeling
behavioral discovery method
EMExt
executable system architecture
6. The really elegant reduction
All three ultimately center on the same loop:
Agent
↓
Intent
↓
Fact
↓
Interpretation
↓
Agent
Event Modeling simply maps that loop to software behavior.
7. Where your filesystem truth graph fits
Your POC likely models EMExt primitives as nodes.
Example graph:
Agent
→ Trigger
→ Command
→ Event
→ Projection
→ View
While Nexus primitives describe the semantics of the graph.
✅ So the stack becomes:
NEXUS
Universal ontology
EVENT MODELING
Behavioral modeling method
EMExt
Explicit implementation ontology
If you'd like, the next step that could dramatically clarify your Nexus architecture is something most people never formalize but you’re very close to:
the difference between “Ontology” and “Physics” of a domain universe.
That concept would explain why your primitives behave the way they do and why the Event Modeling loop keeps appearing across domains.