CORE served the affirmative of propositions the user denied. Measured live on
main @ 536d6e55 with realizer_grounded_authority=True:
"evidence does not support truth" -> 'Evidence is verified: what supports truth.'
"evidence supports truth" -> 'Evidence is verified: what supports truth.'
Byte-identical.
Phase 4 (#136) pinned "render_semantic has no negated parameter" as a defect.
Sizing the exposure before acting on it -- the step §7 requires -- showed the
pin was correct and INCOMPLETE. The defect is two drops in series, and the
first is in the graph:
intent.negated parsed from the user's words, always has been
GraphNode NO FIELD FOR IT <-- first drop
ground_graph rebuilds nodes field-by-field; nothing to carry
depth enrichment rebuilds nodes field-by-field; nothing to carry
plan_articulation cannot carry what the node does not hold
realize_semantic never read step.negated
render_semantic no parameter for it <-- second drop
Five separate constructors, each silently defaulting to the affirmative.
Why every gate was green
------------------------
On the default config the ungrounded realizer emits "...", _is_useful_surface
rejects it, and the runtime echo wins the resolver -- and the echo contains the
user's own "does not". The truth path was correct BY ACCIDENT. ADR-0088 Phase B
grounds the graph first, which is exactly when the realizer's surface becomes
useful enough to win. So the defect sat behind a shipped flag, invisible to
every property-of-one-surface test, because nothing compared a denial to its
assertion.
Delivered
---------
- GraphNode.negated, threaded intent -> graph -> ground -> enrich -> step ->
surface. Serialized ONLY when True, so every pre-existing as_dict and every
trace_hash folded from one stays byte-identical -- which is why no lane pin
moves.
- Clause grammar delegated to its one owner. Four of the eight intent
"templates" were never frames; they were plain clauses. They now call
render_step. Writing a second negation implementation in semantic_templates
was the tempting fix and is rejected: Phase 2A spent a unit giving every
linguistic fact one owner, and that design rebuilds the disease one level up.
- Frames that keep a finite verb (VERIFICATION, PROCEDURE, COMPARISON) get an
explicit negated form. RECALL is a speech act with no proposition to deny, so
it falls back to the clause path rather than drop the denial (ADR-0261 §5.1).
Measured
--------
delegation on affirmatives 192/192 byte-identical
serving realizer, all corpora 85/347 -> 109/347 (+24 = the denials)
feature-bearing bucket 49/214 -> 73/214
CONTROL (nothing droppable) 33/33 -> 33/33 unchanged
multi-node (clause joining) 3/100 -> 3/100 unchanged, out of scope
lane pins 11/11 byte-identical, none edited
The control staying 33/33 and multi-node staying 3/100 is the evidence that
this moved the denials and nothing else.
The exhaustive control earned its keep immediately
--------------------------------------------------
It found FIVE more intents serving a denial as its own assertion --
TRANSITIVE_QUERY, FRAME_TRANSFER, NARRATIVE, EXAMPLE, DEDUCTION -- because an
intent with no frame fell back to the UNKNOWN *template* (which cannot say
"not") rather than the UNKNOWN *clause* (which can). The default is now the
capable path, so the next intent added inherits correctness. Found by the
control, not by inspection.
Mutation -- every link reverted individually
--------------------------------------------
baseline 19 pass
graph_from_intent drops intent.negated 8 FAIL
plan_articulation drops node.negated 6 FAIL
ground_graph drops it on rebuild 2 FAIL
realize_semantic stops passing step.negated 6 FAIL
unframed intents fall back to the template 1 FAIL
pipeline depth-enrichment drops it 1 FAIL
The last row was GREEN on the first run -- my fix there was unguarded. That is
what added the structural invariant: every GraphNode(...) built on the serving
path must NAME `negated` or be recorded in an allowlist with a reason. The
defect was five constructors; a per-site test must be written per site, and a
site added without one is invisible. Only recognition/connector.py is exempt
(an EpistemicNode has no polarity to carry).
Four Phase 4 pins are revised, not relaxed -- #136's M2 mutation ("render_semantic
GAINS a negated parameter -> FAIL") has now happened for real, and forced the
deliberate revision it was built to force.
Registered in `smoke` in the same PR that creates it, per the #136 finding that
an unregistered pin runs nowhere.
Still unexpressed, deliberately: quantifier, tense, aspect. NO PRODUCER sets
them anywhere on the serving path, so threading them would be machinery with no
caller. render_step already handles all three the moment a producer exists.
[Verification]: in-worktree on CPython 3.12.13 with `uv sync --locked` --
smoke 641 (was 621), deductive 503, lane pins 11/11 with no pin edited.
Phase 4 of the grammar-unification arc, resolved by option (b) of the plan.
The problem: 149 green fluency cases scored `realize_target`, and
`core/cognition/pipeline.py` never calls it -- it calls `realize_semantic`.
`english_fluency_ood` reported 117/117 + 39/39 for a function that does not
speak, for the whole life of the lane.
The plan framed this as "which realizer is better". Reading the source says it
is not a quality question. `render_semantic`'s signature is
`(intent, subject, predicate, obj, secondary, language, root)` -- no `negated`,
no `quantifier`, no `tense`, no `aspect` -- and `realize_semantic` never reads
them off the step. So the serving writer cannot express content the
ArticulationStep is carrying:
negated=False -> 'Knowledge is defined as opinion.'
negated=True -> 'Knowledge is defined as opinion.'
It serves the AFFIRMATIVE of a negated proposition. That is the ADR-0261 §5.1
family, not a fluency defect. Pinned here as a defect; NOT fixed, because
fixing it changes served output and belongs to Shay.
Measured -- identical contract, all seven scored corpora
--------------------------------------------------------
bucket n realize_target realize_semantic
feature-bearing, single node 214 207 49
no features, multi-node 100 100 3
no features, single node (CONTROL) 33 33 33
total 347 340 85
The control is what makes the rest mean anything. Every corpus hardcodes
IntentTag.UNKNOWN, so "the serving writer scores badly" could have been an
artifact of never giving it a real intent. On the 33 cases carrying nothing it
cannot express, the two are IDENTICAL -- so the gap on the other 314 is the
dropped features and the clause joining, not the intent.
Delivered
---------
- `grammatical_coverage/runner.py` reports `serving_accuracy` beside
`accuracy`; `english_fluency_ood` delegates to that run_lane and gains it
for free. The realizer is a parameter now instead of a hardcoded import.
- `tests/test_phase4_realizer_resolution.py` -- the control, the decomposition,
the negation defect pin, and the §6 evidence.
- The claim is restated at both places it was made: the lane docstring and
`grammar_roundtrip/contract.md`.
Zero served bytes change. No serving authorization needed.
§6 -- the plan's pre-commitment was wrong, and is corrected rather than
quietly edited
------------------------------------------------------------------------
§6 forks on read_rate: risen => Phase 5 diversity; near-zero => §1.8 graph-model
mismatch => ADR. It pre-committed to the second. Neither is what the
measurement says.
g_read_rate went to 1/293. The unblocked case was blocked by a one-line WRITER
defect (predicate-nominal object agreement, #135), not by §1.8. The other 292:
no_template_match 289 reader has no SUBJ-VERB-OBJ template at all
unknown_morphology 2 prepositional objects (reserved_word_in_np)
unsupported_negation 1 reader has no negated-categorical template
Every one is the reader declining a CONSTRUCTION, not a projection disagreeing
about a graph it parsed. Where a construction is in both inventories the round
trip closes exactly. So the barrier is the OVERLAP of the two construction
inventories, currently one construction wide -- Phase 5's item 1, tractable,
not an ADR-scale model decision.
§1.6 read "uniform no_template_match" as evidence FOR the type mismatch. It is
not: no_template_match is a coverage fact, and the corpus was 289/293 bare
transitives, a construction the reader never claimed to read. The measurement
was mostly reporting the corpus's composition.
And a finding in my own stack
------------------------------
`tests/test_realizer_quantifier_agreement.py` lived ONLY in the `cognition`
suite, which is not on the AGENTS.md pre-push gate. So every pin Phases 3 and 4
added to it -- including the invariant covering all twelve inflection branches
-- ran in NO gate. That is why smoke stayed at 621 across two PRs that added 13
tests between them, and it is the same silent-red shape the smoke list already
calls out for test_adr_index.py.
Registered into `deductive`, which now runs 504 instead of 406.
Mutation
--------
baseline 12 pass
serving metric computed with realize_target 4 FAIL
render_semantic GAINS a `negated` parameter 2 FAIL
realize_semantic delegated to realize_target 6 FAIL
Row 2 matters most: if someone FIXES the negation defect, the pin forces a
deliberate revision instead of passing silently.
Still open, still Shay's: option (a), promoting realize_target to the serving
path. It now has a price tag -- 340/347 over 85/347 and the ability to say
"not", against a move in every surface hash and whatever the Shadow Coherence
Gate ruling in core/cognition/surface_resolution.py was protecting.
[Verification]: in-worktree on CPython 3.12.13 with `uv sync --locked` --
smoke 621, deductive 504 (was 406; +12 new Phase 4 pins, +86 previously
ungated), lane pins 11/11 unchanged, no pin edited.
Shay