Commit graph

2 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Shay
5c77c9eece feat(field-wedge): ablation verdict — field is decoration on additive (C3) (Phase W.2)
The falsifiable experiment's measurements #2 (ablation) and #3 (diversity). Builds the
competent, code-disjoint SYMBOLIC reader (the control arm AND the C3 capability path)
and the ablation instrument that runs both readers through the real
verify_tier2_agreement gate.

VERDICT: C3 — the field is decoration on this domain (a sanctioned, honest negative):
- field_wrong_commits = []  (wrong=0 holds; the per-step drift guard refuses bad ints)
- field_caught_symbolic_errors = []  (the field caught ZERO symbolic errors)
- per-class diversity = 0 everywhere (both readers agree and are both correct)
- the only admitted-set change is the field LOSING coverage at the precision ceiling.

Insight: on forward-substitutable relations, geometric translation IS arithmetic
addition, so there is no metric over-determination for the field to exploit — field and
symbol are common-mode (Knight-Leveson), not a genuine second derivation. This is the
deductive finding's twin: logic was combinatorial (field can't earn it), additive is
arithmetically trivial (field adds nothing). The field needs metric-nontrivial AND
arithmetically-hard structure to earn a reasoning role — dedicated research, not
near-term. Field-as-reasoner is NOT earned; no field vote enters any serving path; the
field stays a servant. Capability path = symbolic (C3), not shipped here.

- generate/relational_symbolic_reader.py: competent independent reader (pure int).
- evals/relational_metric/ablation.py: the reusable decoration instrument.
- docs/analysis/field-wedge-ablation-result-2026-06-04.md: the recorded verdict.

All prior artifacts STAY (field reader = real wrong=0 read demo + 3rd panel domain).
Green: full wedge suite 104; 53 architectural invariants.
2026-06-04 19:44:22 -07:00
Shay
145d797196 feat(field-wedge): geometric field reader — relational-metric lane wrong=0 (Phase W.1)
Measurement #1 of the field-reasoner falsifiable experiment: does the CL(4,1) field,
given an honest metric encoding, read forward-substitutable quantitative-relational
problems from TEXT with wrong==0? It does — 14/15 correct, 0 wrong, 1 refused
(precision ceiling), scored against an independent arithmetic oracle.

- generate/relational_field_reader.py: reads problem text into conformal points on
  the e1 number line; additive/part-whole relations are conformal TRANSLATOR versors
  (versor_apply(T_delta, embed[x]) == embed[x+delta], exact); the answer reads back
  by projective dehomogenization. Refusal-first: fences multiplicative/ratio (the
  sign/orientation-blind cases), the precision ceiling, non-forward-substitutable
  references, negatives. A per-step exactness self-check turns any f64 translator
  drift into a refusal (precision_drift) — it NEVER commits a wrong integer. Its
  parser is an independent reimplementation importing no generate.derivation/math_*.
- evals/relational_metric/: independent arithmetic oracle (computes gold from the
  STRUCTURE, shares no code with the reader), 15-case fixture, and a runner that
  enforces gold integrity + wrong==0.
- INV-25: relational_metric registered in INDEPENDENT_GOLD_LANES (oracle proven
  code-disjoint from the field reader and the algebra engine). The independently
  golded panel is now three domains: deductive, dimensional, relational-metric.

Green: smoke 87, 53 architectural invariants, 16 new tests; deductive + dimensional
lanes unperturbed (wrong=0).
2026-06-04 19:34:43 -07:00