Merge pull request 'Ratify ADR-0264 — Accepted, with §4.1 self-superseded by its own R5' (#127) from docs/ratify-adr-0264 into main

This commit is contained in:
Joshua Matthew-Catudio Shay 2026-07-26 21:47:19 +00:00
commit 9696443afe

View file

@ -1,9 +1,16 @@
# ADR-0264 — Negative curriculum, premise scope, and what a curriculum band can earn # ADR-0264 — Negative curriculum, premise scope, and what a curriculum band can earn
- **Status:** Proposed — awaiting Joshua Shay's ratification. This ADR changes no - **Status:** Accepted — ratified by Joshua Shay 2026-07-26. All nine rules
flag and no default; it fixes a schema shape and a compilation rule, and it (R1R9) are implemented and merged to `main` @ `803703fc`. This ADR changes no
records a blocking finding about ADR-0262 §5.1. flag and no default; it fixed a schema shape and a compilation rule, and it
- **Date:** 2026-07-25 recorded a blocking finding about ADR-0262 §5.1. **§4.1 is self-superseded by
this ADR's own R5** — see the note there before citing it.
- **Date:** 2026-07-25 · **Ratified:** 2026-07-26
- **Implemented by:** R5R7 #120 · R9 #117 · R1R4/R8 #125. Enforcement pins:
`tests/test_curriculum_polarity.py` (R1R4, R8),
`tests/test_volume_honesty.py` (R9),
`tests/test_curriculum_serve.py` (R6/R7),
`tests/test_curriculum_practice.py` (R9 at the producer).
- **Arc:** curriculum-license-loop Phase A - **Arc:** curriculum-license-loop Phase A
(`docs/plans/curriculum-license-loop-2026-07-25.md` §4) (`docs/plans/curriculum-license-loop-2026-07-25.md` §4)
- **Governs:** the `polarity` field of `teaching/domain_chains/*.jsonl`, - **Governs:** the `polarity` field of `teaching/domain_chains/*.jsonl`,
@ -260,6 +267,33 @@ because absent `polarity` means affirmative.
### 4.1 No curriculum band can earn a SERVE license under the current architecture ### 4.1 No curriculum band can earn a SERVE license under the current architecture
> **SELF-SUPERSEDED by this ADR's own R5, discharged 2026-07-26. The heading is no
> longer true of the running system.** Read the finding below as a statement about
> the **pre-R5** architecture; it was accurate then and it is why R5 exists.
>
> §4.1's reasoning rests on "the premise cap holds a family to ≤16 chains". R5
> removed that: compilation is query-scoped, so a family of any size answers. With
> the cap gone, **four bands would earn SERVE the moment a ledger is sealed**
> `physics·causal`, `systems_software·causal`, and
> `philosophy_theology·{modal,contrast}` — measured in
> `docs/research/curriculum-practice-producer-2026-07-26.md` §1.
>
> But the conclusion "the binding constraint is not curriculum volume" **survives,
> for a different and stronger reason.** Reliability is commitment precision and a
> correct UNKNOWN is a commitment, so a band clears θ_SERVE **on non-commitments
> alone**: `conservative_floor(660,660) = 0.990046`. The licensable evidence is
> 99.099.98% non-entailed, and max entailed volume in any band is **9**. So §4.1's
> "≥97.6% non-entailed" arithmetic was directionally right and its cause was wrong
> — it is not the premise cap that makes a curriculum license dishonest, it is the
> absence of a mix rule. That also means the plan's Phase-1 exit criterion ("a
> real, still-unearned ledger") is unreachable: a committed ledger is necessarily
> an earning one.
>
> **The binding constraint is now the outcome-mix ruling** (§5, recorded as open
> and still open). `chat/data/curriculum_serve_ledger.json` is deliberately absent
> and `core proposal-queue reseal` refuses to grant a license without
> `--allow-new-licenses`, so nothing is licensed while that ruling is unmade.
This follows from two facts already in the repository, and it does not depend on This follows from two facts already in the repository, and it does not depend on
any rule in §2. any rule in §2.