Abstract / Summary
Preprint v1.0. This public preprint is not peer reviewed, reports no clinical efficacy result, and does not describe a validated product. ID360 does not assess legal decision-making capacity, diagnose impairment, or infer authority from task performance. Post-stroke cognitive and executive impairment can create a mismatch between continuing personal authority and the momentary ability to plan, sequence, monitor, or execute complex action. The practical consequence is not confined to the individual: action may be sustained through family members, professionals, care networks, and technical agents, while the availability and burden of those resources also change over time. This paper develops ID360 from an individual capacity- adaptive action architecture into a person-centred socio-technical framework for governed distributed action. The framework retains the core separation between attributable authorization and execution capacity from ID360-Bridge v1.0, restates that boundary as P3, and adds seven further propositions concerning compensatory load transfer, Distributed Action Capacity (DAC), dynamic function allocation, coordination, distributed monitoring, resilience and recovery, and capacity-exceeding compensation. For a concrete task a at time t, the proposed system state is represented as SystemState(a,t) = (T, G, DAC), where governance G remains outside the capacity construct and DAC = (F, Q, M, R_s, R_c): task-relevant functional capacities, coordination quality, monitoring/supervisory capacity, action reserve, and recovery capacity. The model uses a critical-link principle as a necessary condition rather than a universal total score. A separate task profile combines consequence class with room to act and parameterises control depth, monitoring intensity, allowable deviation, and response/escalation parameters. Runtime operation follows six gates: Task, Governance, Functional Capacity, Coordination, Safeguard, and Execution Verification. For consequential commits, governance validity and, where required, procedural authorization integrity are checked alongside plan-actual congruence in AuthorisedConformantExecution; objective attainment and content correctness remain distinct checks. The framework is informed by targeted evidence from stroke cognition and supported decision- making, care coordination, team science, human-autonomy teaming, resilient performance, and caregiver burden. The component mechanisms have substantial prior art; Distributed Action Capacity and its integration with person-centred authority are presented as synthesis-level constructs requiring validation, not as established clinical facts. The immediate research programme is therefore process- level: co-design, task mapping, simulation, field feasibility, and comparative tests of governance, coordination, monitoring, and recovery before any clinical-effectiveness claim.