core-labs/core
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests 1 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs(l10): reconcile grounding ADR to registry (ADR-0210) + flag gold consistency

Browse source 
Rename adr-012-l10-grounding.md -> ADR-0210-l10-grounding-pack.md: the
requested number collided with ADR-0012-core-ingest-governance-layer.md and
did not follow the ADR-NNNN convention. 0210 is the next free number.

Record the one latent soundness item: l10-adv-003 (false) vs l10-adv-008
(refuse) take different stances on an unsatisfied guard; the discriminating
principle (same-sort negative -> false; cross-sort mismatch -> refuse) must
be encoded by the future symbolic runner before the fixtures become a live
wrong=0 oracle. Pack + fixtures remain inert and byte-identical.
This commit is contained in:
Shay 2026-06-05 10:01:17 -07:00
parent 6eccdb41ea
commit bbf75ff195
1 changed files with 26 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

28
docs/decisions/adr-012-l10-grounding.md → docs/decisions/ADR-0210-l10-grounding-pack.md
View file

@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
# ADR-012-L10-Grounding — L10 finite grounding pack and adversarial wrong=0 fixtures
# ADR-0210 — L10 finite grounding pack and adversarial wrong=0 fixtures
Status: Proposed
Date: 2026-06-05
@ -79,7 +79,31 @@ Negative / deferred:
- No runtime loader is added in this PR.
- No test harness is added in this PR.
- The filename requested here is `adr-012-l10-grounding.md`; this is a working L10 proposal and should be reconciled with the existing ADR registry before final numbering or merge.
- Reconciled with the existing ADR registry at merge: numbered `ADR-0210`
(the originally requested `adr-012-l10-grounding.md` collided with the
existing `ADR-0012-core-ingest-governance-layer.md` and did not follow the
`ADR-NNNN` convention).
## Open reconciliation item (must resolve before the fixtures are wired)
The adversarial fixtures encode two different responses to "the query
subject is in `finite_domain` but the guard relation is unsatisfied":
- `l10-adv-003` resolves to `label: false` / `VERIFIED` (the subject is
grounded in the same relation sort — `member(alice, team_red)` — just not
the guarded value, so closed-world negation makes the query false).
- `l10-adv-008` resolves to `label: refuse` / `SCOPE_BOUNDARY` (the subject
is grounded only in a *different* sort — `asset(asset_1)`, not
`account(...)` — so the rule's range is type-incommensurate and the engine
refuses rather than concluding false).
That distinction (same-sort negative ⇒ `false`; cross-sort/type-mismatch ⇒
`refuse`) is defensible but is not yet stated as a single decision
procedure. A future symbolic runner (verification-plan item 4) MUST encode
the discriminating principle explicitly before these labels become a live
oracle; otherwise the two cases are an inconsistent gold and would not be a
sound independent check. Until then the fixtures are an inert proposal, not
a wired wrong=0 lane.
## Verification plan