The ratified capability, through the existing mutation owner only:
- teaching/proof_promotion.py — pure decider. Fresh-reads every premise AND
the claim from the store (claim_entry_index; forms never proposer-supplied),
strict status compares (no parse-defaulting), reading_certified must be the
boolean True, engine certification via the pinned deductive engine,
proposer_payload accepted and provably never read (del before use; poisoned-
mapping test), certificate digest emitted for D4 trace-hash folding. Zero
mutation; zero vault.store calls; zero status writes (proven with the
INV-21/INV-29 detectors themselves).
- vault/store.py::apply_certified_promotion — the single transition site.
Independently re-verifies: byte-for-byte replay under DEDUCTIVE_ENGINE_PIN,
promotion_positive, live claim form/reading/status cross-checks, live
premise form/reading/status cross-checks (staleness refuses). Fabricated or
tampered certificates flip nothing; authority is live store state plus
recomputation, never the artifact.
- generate/proof_chain/engine_pin.py — DEDUCTIVE_ENGINE_PIN mirrors the
deductive_logic_v1 lane SHA; sync pinned by AST test against
scripts/verify_lane_shas.py.
- Consistency fix found in lookback: both promotion sites now stamp
epistemic_state alongside epistemic_status (the ADR-0148 site left the
stored state tag stale; recall recomputed it, but the stored key lied).
Obligations: all six strict-xfail markers retired and live (O1/O2
strengthened to prove the transition through the vault owner); the
module-existence pin deleted per its own docstring; the two remaining
honesty pins kept. INV-21 allowlist unchanged; INV-29 allowlist unchanged
({vault/store.py}); INV-29's 29c visibility floor raised 2 -> 3 to cover the
new site.
No runtime turn path calls promotion; the deterministic demo is PR D.
Validation: new suite 49 passed; obligations 8 passed (0 xfail remaining);
invariants 66 passed; certificate 27 passed; 0148 6 passed; epistemic 20
passed; smoke files green; lane SHAs verified.
Architect-directed ratification: D1 (pure decider / vault-owned mutation),
D2 (reading stays curator-certified in the first cut), D3 (exact predicate,
including REFUTED -> no transition), D4 (certificate fields + trace-hash
folding), and INV-29 as the permanent transition-site boundary, all ACCEPTED.
Two fail-closed realizations recorded under D3: the claim form is fresh-read
from the claim's own stored entry (never proposer-supplied), and zero-premise
tautology certificates refuse rather than promote in v1.
Docs-only: no runtime behavior changes in this commit. P3 implementation
(teaching/proof_promotion.py + VaultStore.apply_certified_promotion) follows
in the same PR as separate commits.
Pure evidence substrate for proof-carrying coherence promotion. No
promotion, no vault import, no status transition, no teaching-path
change; ADR-0218 stays Proposed.
- generate/proof_chain/certificate.py: frozen PromotionCertificate
(version/claim_form/premise ids+forms+statuses/entailment_trace/
engine_pin/decision/reason, canonical_json with sort_keys+compact
separators); build_certificate runs evaluate_entailment_with_trace
over entry_id-sorted premises; verify_certificate rebuilds from the
embedded forms and accepts iff byte-identical — tampered forms/claim/
trace/decision/reason/ordering/version all fail replay, structural
breakage fails closed as malformed_certificate.
- promotion_positive is necessary-not-sufficient: entailed over a
non-empty all-coherent recorded premise set; REFUTED/UNKNOWN/REFUSED
verify as themselves but are never positive; zero-premise tautology
certificates fail-closed non-positive in v1.
- engine_pin is recorded provenance; pin tampering is caught only via
caller-supplied expected_engine_pin (P3 must pass the lane SHA) —
limit pinned by dedicated tests.
- entail.py: docstring-only fix removing the incorrect ADR-0206
attribution (numbering collision); now cites ADR-0218. Zero behavior
change. generate_claims.py:74 still carries the label (serving-frozen
surface, flagged for follow-up).
- No xfail markers retire: every PR-A obligation binds to the P3
promoter, which must not exist before ratification. The certificate-
shaped halves of O1/O7 are proven for real in
tests/test_proof_chain_certificate.py (27 tests). ADR phasing bullet
and obligations docstring record the reconciliation.
Validation: certificate 27 passed; obligations 3 passed + 6 xfailed;
architectural invariants 61 passed (INV-21/INV-29 green, allowlists
unchanged); entail/builder/rules 61 passed; smoke files 95 passed.
INV-29 is the load-bearing contribution of #693, so its detector must match
its claim. The assignment-only scan missed common write indirections; the
widened _status_transition_writes (renamed from _status_assignment_targets)
now also catches:
- m.update({"epistemic_status": ...}) / update(epistemic_status=...) /
update(**{...}) / update(dict(epistemic_status=...))
- m.setdefault("epistemic_status", ...)
- bound and unbound __setitem__ with the literal key
- setattr(entry, "epistemic_status", ...)
- writes hidden in tuple-unpacking assignment targets
29b now proves all 13 shapes are flagged (per-shape, so one regression names
itself); new 29b' proves reads, other keys, and dict-literal construction do
NOT flag (false positives would train reflexive allowlisting). Honest scope
note added: variable keys / exec / C-level aliasing are statically
undetectable and belong to review.
Pre-scan confirmed zero production call-shape writes exist, so the widened
detector flags nothing new; ALLOWED_STATUS_TRANSITION_SITES stays
{"vault/store.py"}. No runtime change; ADR-0218 still Proposed.
Validation:
- tests/test_architectural_invariants.py: 61 passed
- tests/test_proof_carrying_promotion_obligations.py: 3 passed, 6 xfailed
PR A of the stack specified by docs/issues/proof-carrying-coherence-promotion.md.
No runtime change; no promotion behavior; ADR-0218 is Proposed, not ratified.
- ADR-0218 (Proposed): rulings the issue Section 9 demands — extend the
existing mutation owner (policy decides in teaching/proof_promotion.py at
P3, only vault/store.py mutates), reading stays curator-certified in the
first cut, exact fail-closed admissibility predicate, certificate folds
into trace_hash. Records two substrate corrections: proof_chain Phase 2
(2.1-2.4) is already implemented, and ADR-0148 already automates an
energy-arm promotion.
- INV-29 (passing): epistemic-status transition sites are allowlisted.
ADR-0148's in-place promotion proved INV-21's AST scan cannot see
status transitions (they are not store() calls) — the boundary the
issue calls highest-risk did not actually cover the riskiest shape.
Allowlist pinned to {vault/store.py} BEFORE any promoter exists;
detector mutation-proven non-vacuous (29b/29c).
- Obligations O1-O5, O7 as strict xfail (executable spec; ImportError today;
strict=True forces the P3 PR to retire markers and pass for real) + three
honesty pins that flip red if promotion is wired without review.
Validation (worktree off main@187b008b, python -m pytest):
- tests/test_proof_carrying_promotion_obligations.py: 3 passed, 6 xfailed
- tests/test_architectural_invariants.py: 60 passed (56 prior + 4 INV-29)
- smoke file set: 94 passed
- proof_chain/entail/binding-graph/ADR-0148 set: 84 passed
- epistemic/teaching set: 40 passed
- scripts/verify_lane_shas.py: 8/9 pinned lanes match incl. deductive_logic_v1;
public_demo missed on the known env wall-clock budget flake (47.6s > 30s),
pre-existing and unrelated (diff is docs+tests only).
§3.4 said promotion "requires a curator-mediated coherence judgment." That
over-states a necessity. ADR-0021 §3 only requires promotion be a function of
coherence with the reviewed field. For claims *deductively entailed* by
already-COHERENT facts, the entailment proof IS that coherence judgment and can
be machine-certified by the sound deductive_logic_v1 engine — the logical arm of
the "structural coherence metric" ADR-0021's v2 gap already names.
- position_paper.md §3.4: split "own asserted output" (no standing — kept) from
"deductively entailed from COHERENT facts" (proof = coherence judgment);
relocate review to the *reading*, not the deduction; flag the proof-carrying
path as specified-but-unwired with a link to the new issue.
- teaching/epistemic.py: the EpistemicStatus docstring claimed transitions are
"computed from coherence" — they are not; review_correction carries status as
a curator-supplied input. Docstring now states this honestly.
- docs/issues/proof-carrying-coherence-promotion.md: thorough spec for the
unbuilt capability (scope, the reading hazard, INV-21 impact, trust boundary,
falsification tests, phased plan, proposed ADR-0218).
No runtime behavior change. Green: test_epistemic_invariants,
test_epistemic_phase3_state_tagging, TestINV21OneMutationPath (15 passed).
This demo assigns epistemic truth-state only and runs no normative/
safety/ethics clearance pass, so it has no basis to positively clear
a claim. Drop the verified->cleared mapping: verified now reports
normative_clearance=unassessable like every other non-invalid output.
Updates authority.py, regenerates the affected expected trace hashes,
tightens the test (verified asserts unassessable) and adds an invariant
test that no non-invalid output is ever cleared, and corrects the README
honesty ledger.
A model-style proposer submits a claim, evidence bundle, and optional
bounded-inference block; CORE alone assigns the typed epistemic state
drawn from the canonical core.epistemic_state taxonomy (no parallel
enum) and emits a deterministic, replayable evidence artifact.
The proposer cannot set assigned_state, status, trace_hash,
authority_path, evidence_ledger, or normative_clearance: the closed
recursive schema rejects any root-level injection before state
evaluation runs, and proposer-supplied proposed_state/trace_hash are
recorded as ignored and never read.
Adds closed schema, six fixtures, pinned expected artifacts, a
double-run byte-identical runner with hardened output-dir policy, and a
22-test suite. No network, subprocess, eval/exec, model API, or side
effects beyond demo output.
Tool Authority Demo (#688) was still tagged 'draft PR / in review' but it
merged at c55f7dfb. Hybrid Verification Demo (#687) lacked the claims-authority
framing and the agreement-is-not-safety finding. Reposition both as merged
evidence, name the next public evidence target, and align epistemic-state vocab.
- #687 = authority over claims; #688 = authority over proposed tool actions.
- Removed stale 'In progress / draft PR / in review' status on #688.
- Added explicit next-target ordering: Epistemic Truth-State -> Embodied
Authority Simulation -> SaaS/On-Prem Boundary.
- No named-company, outreach, or production/robotics overclaims introduced.
A narrow, auditable proof path for the hybrid-mode boundary: a
Claude/Fable-style System 1 proposer submits an MCP-shaped tool call
(core.semantic_derivation.verify); CORE re-derives via the ADR-0184
derivation lane, keeps sole acceptance authority, refuses or asks when
it cannot honestly answer, and emits a deterministic replay/provenance
trace for every decision.
Boundary properties (each pinned by a failing-if-removed test):
- the proposer has no commit path: additionalProperties:false schema,
and the demo modules import nothing from generate.* (AST-scanned with
a planted-bypass self-test) — the lane is consumed only through the
ADR-0184 S4b audited trace facade;
- 'verified' requires pool commit AND clean commit-law/faithfulness
audits AND a gold-audited envelope.json entry AND byte-match to the
pinned derivation trace (measured: 118 of the off-serving pool's 231
corpus commits disagree with lane gold, so a bare pool commit is
never served — scenario s4 shows the refusal on a commit that even
matches gold);
- the ask leg is the real Q1 stack (router -> limitation -> Q1-D
producer -> carried handle -> gated serving), dark by default,
tamper-fail-closed on the content hash;
- authority_path names only consulted authorities; responses are
deterministic (double-run byte-identical) and pinned under expected/.
No serving/runtime change; no CLAIMS/metrics/telemetry/lane-pin
movement; no network or Anthropic API dependency (System 1 payloads are
clearly-labeled static fixtures).
- Explicit System 1/2 framing in thesis and §2 (Claude proposes; CORE decides)
- Named Bounded Transition Guarantee (v2.1) callout box in §2
- Conditioned false-positive claim on correctly specified Anchor (§1)
- Named Type-Safe Local Closure security model in Lens layer and §5 Signal 1
- §7 renamed 'The Ask — Hybrid Mode Wedge' with MCP-shaped experiment framing
- §5 stats (716/716, 0 wrong) explicitly tied to BTG, not tuning/sampling
- §6 Honest Limits: explicit Hybrid vs Native Mode distinction added
- Harmful variant table row: 'licensed scope is a ratified human policy decision'
ADR-0184 S4b — the replay/provenance equivalence boundary, the
precondition for any semantic-primary path. After #685 the in-repo
legacy path delegates to the semantic boundary, so old-vs-new is
vacuous; the durable reference is a pinned canonical trace artifact
(evals/gsm8k_math/equivalence/v1/, 937 problems) whose authority is
the #684/#685 cross-tree differentials (documented provenance chain).
- state/provenance.py: replay_is_faithful — the replay bridge's law as
a checkable structural property (no verify/pool import; covered by
the #685 authority scan).
- equivalence/trace.py: canonical traces (worlds, candidates, order,
multiplicity, classifications, resolutions) + authority_violations
re-deriving the pool commit law from trace content.
- scripts/verify_semantic_equivalence.py: check / --update gate
mirroring verify_lane_shas.py.
- tests/test_adr_0184_s4b_replay_equivalence.py: full-corpus live-vs-
pinned equality, corpus-wide authority + faithfulness, and 17
single-mutation non-vacuity proofs.
Pure additions; verify.py/pool.py untouched; no serving, CLAIMS,
metrics, or lane pins moved.
