Each concept is read twice: whether the approach carries it, and whether the approach's own sources claim it. A concept that is absent and was never claimed is a gap in the field rather than a failure of the work, and is marked out of scope.
Segmental autonomy
PresentClaimed · deliveredDefinition · Arend Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies (1977)
In a deeply divided society, each group governs its own internal affairs — its schools, its family law — within its own sphere, instead of everyone living under one uniform rule.
Analysis
Segments here are national jurisdictions and each keeps authority over its own internal affairs; certification attaches to the state's oversight regime rather than to any firm or model inside it. That is Lijphart's structure taken at face value — the segments govern themselves, and the international layer only certifies that they do.
Choice-of-law rule
AbsentNot claimed · out of scopeDefinition · Friedrich Carl von Savigny, System of the Modern Roman Law (1849)
When several bodies of rules could govern the same case, an explicit rule decides which one actually does — and states the reason. Without such a rule, "different rules for different groups" has no answer for the cases in between.
Analysis
Certification says which states meet a standard; it never says whose rules govern a given case. A model deployed across borders, or a user in one jurisdiction querying a system hosted in another, gets no answer from this regime — the in-between cases Savigny's rule exists for are outside its frame entirely.
Mutual veto and proportionality
PartialClaimed · partialDefinition · Arend Lijphart, Democracy in Plural Societies (1977)
Decisions that affect all groups require every group's consent, and representation is proportional to each group's size — so no segment can simply be outvoted on what matters most to it.
Analysis
Import and export restrictions give each certified state real leverage over the others' conduct, which is closer to a mutual check than anything else in this cell has. But it is leverage proportional to market power, not a veto proportional to stake: a small state's objection carries the weight of its trade, and a large one can proceed over it.