Datta SableDATA / DESIGN / ENGINEERING
← BACK_TO_RFC_HUB
PUBLISHED_MAY_2026
RFC-003 Specification
STATUS: DRAFT

Operator Intent Mapping.

"The gap between human thought and machine execution is where value is lost. OIM bridges this gap through rigorous persona alignment."

# Abstract

Operator Intent Mapping (OIM) is a protocol for aligning Large Language Model (LLM) execution with professional human persona and tactical goals. This RFC specifies the standards for persona injection, intent decomposition, and output alignment in expert-tier AI systems.

# Alignment Protocol

Phase 1: Persona Calibration. Phase 2: Intent Decomposition (Hierarchical). Phase 3: Actionable Node Mapping. Phase 4: Feedback Loop Integration.

# Compliance Standards

OIM-compliant prompts MUST include a defined 'Operator Persona' and SHOULD utilize 'Tactical Constraints' to prevent intent drift.

# Implementation Blueprint

INTENT_MAP.json
{
  "rfc": "003",
  "persona_profile": {
    "role": "TECHNICAL_FOUNDER",
    "authority_tone": "SURGICAL",
    "bias": "DETERMINISTIC_LOGIC"
  },
  "intent_vectors": [
    { "goal": "DATA_SYNTHESIS", "granularity": "HIGH" },
    { "goal": "SYSTEM_AUDIT", "granularity": "CRITICAL" }
  ]
}

Cite OIM Protocol

@techreport{sable2026rfc003,
  author = {Sable, Datta},
  title = {RFC-003: Operator Intent Mapping Protocol v1.4.2},
  institution = {Surgical AI Workspace},
  year = {2026},
  url = {https://dattasable.com/knowledge/rfc/003-intent-mapping}
}

Internal reference · Illustrative example

Example: distinguish a writing request from permission to publish

A request to draft a technical launch post establishes an output goal. It does not by itself authorize publishing, quoting confidential customer data, or claiming measured savings. Record the audience, the one change being explained, the available evidence, and the actions that still require an explicit decision.

Verification checklist

  • Separate the requested artifact from external actions.
  • Label hypothetical examples and estimates.
  • Preserve rejected approaches and unresolved questions.
  • Ask the requester to resolve conflicting requirements.

Intent mapping is a local planning technique, not a guarantee of alignment. A model-assigned role does not create expertise or consent. Verify the draft against the evidence and permissions before publication; use a question or an unresolved status when those inputs are incomplete.

Use the engineering-post publication checklist