The attempt/score/ledger half existed (run_practice -> ClassTally scored vs
gold); nothing consulted the gate to turn earned reliability into a ratifiable
proposal. Adds core/reliability_gate/propose.py (propose_from_ledger +
RatifiableProposal): for each class, license_for(PROPOSE) emits a proposal iff
its conservative Wilson floor (0 below N_MIN=10) clears theta=0.85. Refusals
never penalize; deterministic; PROPOSAL-ONLY (never a serving mutation).
propose_runner.py closes the loop end-to-end with an aggressive sealed scorer
(resolve_pooled): practice 95c/5w/50r -> ONE proposal (additive, reliability
0.8608>=0.85, 95/100); 5 wrongs tolerated but floor held; rest stayed sealed.
The gold-tethered autonomous contemplation: the engine earns the right to ASK,
not to SERVE. 11 failing-under-violation tests.
The first cross-clause comprehension reading: one actor's quantity changes over
successive clauses ("Sam has 14 apples. He buys 9 more." -> 14 + 9). It is the
safe specialisation of the cross-clause sum that GB-3a refuses wholesale (the
Alice/Tom hazard) — we chain only when (same referent) AND (a licensed change
cue of unambiguous polarity), else refuse.
generate/derivation/accumulate.py — compose_accumulation:
- anchor on clause 1's single quantity; apply +M (gain) / -M (loss) per later
change clause, operand taken in the anchor's unit (accumulation is same-dimension);
routed through the unchanged self-verification gate.
- polarity (ordered, so ambiguous "gives" is resolved not guessed): "more" -> gain;
else unambiguous loss verb -> loss; else gives/gave + to/away -> loss; else
unambiguous gain verb -> gain; else REFUSE.
- referent guard (the ADR-0174 multi-actor hazard's defensive fix, built minimally
in the clean lane — NOT the retired gender-blind resolver): a later clause's
subject token must be a pronoun or the anchor's name; a NEW named subject (Tom)
-> refuse. Pronoun gender/number is not matched; a new name is the only signal.
evals/.../accumulation_runner.py — practice scorer: on a base refusal, attempt
compose_accumulation and gold-check (mirrors search_runner). Sealed: fires only
on already-refused cases, never alters serving.
Measured (sealed practice additive lane): 0 -> 55 correct, wrong unchanged at 1
(the base scorer's pre-existing one; accumulation added 55 correct, 0 wrong). The
36 still-refused are multi-change (GB-3b.2) or unrecognised verbs (vocab growth) —
conservative, never wrong.
Proof obligations (tests fail under the violation): new-named-actor refuses (H1),
no/ambiguous change cue refuses, list anchor refuses, multi-change refuses,
determinism. 136 targeted tests + architectural invariants green; serving 3/47/0
byte-identical (lane-SHA 8/8, claims --check OK).
CP-2a populates the CP-1 ledger from gold-labelled candidate readings and reports
per-pattern reliability — the measurement the cue-precision thesis rests on. Plus
the function-word unit filter, whose value this measurement makes concrete (clean
unit_shape labelling).
What landed (all sealed; serving 3/47/0 byte-identical):
- generate/cue_precision/trainer.py — train_from_cases(cases, enumerators): folds
gold-labelled candidate chains into the ledger via record_case. Decoupled (the
candidate enumerators are injected, so the package still imports nothing from
search). candidates_for dedupes a reading shared by two enumerators.
- generate/derivation/multistep.py — extracted the enumeration half of search_chain
into public candidate_chains(problem_text); search_chain now delegates (verified
byte-identical: ms3 tests + practice counts unchanged). CP-2 needs the readings
the search weighs, not just the one it resolves.
- generate/derivation/extract.py — function-word unit filter (_NON_UNIT_WORDS):
blanks spurious function-word units ($0.75 each -> "", 3/4 of -> "") that
corrupt same-unit detection and unit_shape. Closed lexeme set, ADR-0165-safe.
- evals/gsm8k_math/practice/v1/cue_precision_report.py — trains over 200 sealed
cases (50 train_sample + 150 ADR-0163-F additive) with the real enumerators and
prints the per-pattern reliability table.
- tests/test_adr_0177_cp2a_training.py — trainer obligations (credit/dedupe/
determinism/empty) via synthetic enumerators; real-measurement well-formedness;
search_chain parity.
Load-bearing finding (recorded in ADR-0177): over 200 cases EVERY (cue,op,unit_shape)
pattern floors at ~0.0 reliability (best: for-multiply-cross_unit 0.0116 at 2/34).
The blunt product/sum-of-all readings are almost always wrong vs gold, so the
conservative floor correctly trusts nothing. => CP-2b (trust reliable cues) is
blocked on candidate GENERATION, not the ledger: candidate readings must get less
crude (clause/referent structure, ADR-0178 GB-3b) before any cue earns reliability.
Cue-precision and compositional structure are coupled; structure comes first.
Verification: 107 targeted tests green (CP-2a/CP-1/extract/ms3/GB-1/2/3/MS-1/2) +
architectural invariants; serving CLAIMS.md sha unchanged; practice 4/1/45 and
0/1/149 unchanged. Inert: trains/reports only, consulted by no search/gate.
Adds `evals/gsm8k_math/practice/v1/cases.jsonl` — 150 GSM8K-style word
problems covering only additive/subtractive operations. All cases carry
`<<a+b=c>>` / `<<a-b=c>>` annotations; none contain `*` or `/`, so every
case classifies as `"additive"` under `classify_operation`.
Four difficulty bands:
0001–0030 single add (14 distinct units, 15 entity names)
0031–0060 single subtract
0061–0090 two same-direction operations
0091–0150 mixed add+subtract and multi-step (2–4 steps)
IDs are `gsm8k-practice-v1-NNNN`, deterministically ordered.
`train_sample/v1/cases.jsonl` and its pinned SHA are untouched.
`build_search_report` continues to run unchanged.
Adds `_PRACTICE_CASES_PATH` constant and `_load_practice_cases()` /
`build_practice_report()` to `practice/v1/runner.py` as additive
symbols; `build_report()` and all existing imports are preserved.
New practice case count: 150.
ADR-0175 Phase 3b — the first live attempt generator. Runs only in the sealed
practice lane, only on cases the engine refused; every proposal is gated by the
Phase 3a self-verification gate.
generate/derivation/:
- extract.py: extract_quantities() — lexeme-level (number + unit word; ADR-0165).
- search.py: search_multiplicative() — one in-clause product candidate per
sentence with >=2 quantities + a present multiplicative cue; gated by
select_self_verified. Per-sentence scope + multi-candidate disagreement give
the uniqueness gate real teeth (two qualifying sentences -> refuse). The cue
set {each,every,for,per,times} is an explicit PROVISIONAL hypothesis the
practice loop refines, not a claimed-correct grammar.
evals/gsm8k_math/practice/v1/search_runner.py: search_augmented_scorer +
build_search_report — base scorer, then a practice-only attempt on refusals.
MEASUREMENT (the deliverable, per the breadth-of-impact test):
practice with search: correct=4 wrong=9 refused=37 (baseline 3/0/47)
- Flips +1 (0021, the clean in-clause aggregate) and its renumbered/reworded
variants (ADR-0114a perturbation guard) -> a real capability, not memorisation.
- 9 wrong attempts -> elimination records (§9), the learning signal. The naive
full-product cue model over-attempts; the eliminations are exactly the signal
that refines it.
HONEST FINDING: self-verification (grounding ∧ cue ∧ unit ∧ uniqueness) is
NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT — 9/13 self-verified attempts were wrong vs gold.
The gap is cue PRECISION / which-quantities-compose (the knowledge axis), not
'can we multiply' (skill). This is why the search runs sealed: gold catches the
9, and case 0050 (canary) attempted-and-failed IN PRACTICE without touching
serving -> validates the seal.
Invariants: #1 seal (serving still 3/47/0; 0050 refuses in serving; no
generate/chat import of the lane), #3 determinism. Serving wrong=0 untouched.
Verified: 3a+3b 31/31; ruff clean; serving lane 4/4; smoke 67/67.
ADR-0175 Phase 2 — a NEW lane (evals/gsm8k_math/practice/v1/), separate from the
wrong=0-pinned serving runner which is NOT modified. Runs the 50 cases in
practice mode: scores correct/wrong/refused as practice metrics, feeds per-class
counts into the Phase 1 ledger, diagnoses every refusal (§8), emits an
elimination record per wrong.
- classify_operation: gold-derived primary op class {multiplicative,divisive,
additive} from <<a*b=c>> calc annotations (Tier-1 checkable in practice).
- diagnose_refusal (§8): skill_gap / knowledge_gap / genuine_ambiguity router.
- EliminationRecord (§9): wrong attempt gold caught -> pruning signal.
- PracticeReport: counts + per-class ledger + diagnoses + eliminations; as_dict.
- run_practice(cases, scorer=...): injectable scorer for tests; defaults to the
candidate-graph scorer (read-only — never alters serving).
Live result mirrors serving (3 correct / 0 wrong / 47 refused of 50) because the
engine still refuses rather than guesses — attempts/eliminations go live in
Phase 3. But the diagnosis is already actionable: 35 skill_gap / 12 knowledge_gap
/ 0 genuine_ambiguity — 74% of refusals are skill gaps (Phase 3's search target),
quantifying the skill-vs-knowledge split.
Invariants: #1 seal (serving still 3/47/0; no generate/chat import of the lane),
#3 determinism (report byte-identical across runs). Elimination + wrong-tolerance
paths unit-tested via injected scorer (no live wrongs yet).
Verified: Phase 1+2 53/53, serving train_sample tests 4/4 (seal), smoke 67/67,
ruff clean.
