Follow-up to PR #398 — lights up the dormant consumption path by
extending _match_rate_with_currency to publish composition_shape +
pre-composed CandidateInitial in parsed_anchors.
Scope: one matcher extension (_match_rate_with_currency) for the
currency-per-unit composition shape ("$X each"). Other composition
shapes (multi-quantity, additive, subtractive) deferred to ME-3/4/5
follow-ups.
Subject binding decision pinned: Option A (refuse when same-sentence
subject is absent). Forbids Option B (placeholder subject —
fabricates attribution). Defers Option C (cross-sentence subject)
to its own ME-2 brief.
Honest consequence: case 0019 stays refused in THIS PR (requires
Option C). Truth-test #1 replaced with a synthetic "Maria bought 3
vet appointments at $400 each" canary that has same-sentence
subject. The flywheel turns one revolution: ratify → compile →
load → consume → admit, end-to-end on the synthetic canary.
Operator profile: Opus (load-bearing wrong=0; pre-composed
CandidateInitial; case 0050 mandatory pin).
Test surface enumerated (4 test files, 12+ tests):
- test_matcher_extension_currency_per_unit (8 narrowness tests)
- test_matcher_extension_case_0050_hazard_pin (mandatory)
- test_matcher_extension_end_to_end_admission (truth test)
- test_matcher_extension_train_sample_baseline_preserved
- test_matcher_extension_public_split_preserved
6-row truth test pinned. Anti-regression invariants enumerated.
Forbidden surface includes Option B + new SAFE category entries +
solver mutation.
Recommended next dispatch sequence: ME-1 → ME-2 (case 0019) →
ME-3/4/5 (remaining composition shapes).
Production-line dispatch form of the consumption-wiring brief in
PR #396. One bundled PR recommended (CW-1 + CW-2 share pack-compile
+ manifest extension + case 0050 pin). Split only if CI cycle time
forces.
CW-1 — Frame consumption:
language_packs/compile_frames.py + generate/comprehension/frame_registry.py
+ reader wire + manifest frame_checksum extension.
CW-2 — Composition consumption:
language_packs/compile_compositions.py +
generate/comprehension/composition_registry.py + injector wire in
generate/recognizer_anchor_inject.py + manifest
composition_checksum extension. SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES
enforced at load (defense in depth); polarity "falsifies"
suppresses injection (not silently "affirms").
Truth test pinned as binding (6-row table). PR is not done unless
case 0019 admits, case 0050 stays refused, train_sample moves from
3/47 → ≥4/46, wrong==0 holds, public split unchanged (150/150),
empty-registry runtime byte-identical to today.
Operator profile: Opus (load-bearing wrong=0 surface; case 0050
mandatory pin; same rigor as CC-2).
Names the structural gap discovered in the first end-to-end
CompositionClaim ratification (2026-05-27 post-#393):
ratification handler writes JSONL artifacts cleanly, but no runtime
code reads compositions/*.jsonl or frames/*.jsonl. Two of three
sub-types ship the ratification half of the loop without the
consumption half.
State:
lexicon/ writer ✓ reader ✓ (LexicalClaim — closed)
frames/ writer ✓ reader ✗ (FrameClaim — half-open)
compositions/ writer ✓ reader ✗ (CompositionClaim — half-open)
Proposes one bundled PR (CW-1 + CW-2) mirroring the proven
generate/comprehension/lexicon.py::load_lexicon pattern:
CW-1 — Frame consumption: pack-compile frames/*.jsonl into a
runtime-loadable artifact; new load_frame_registry()
loader; reader wire.
CW-2 — Composition consumption: pack-compile compositions/*.jsonl;
new load_composition_registry(); injector wire in
generate/recognizer_anchor_inject.py.
Hard requirements: SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES allowlist enforced
at both write and load (defense in depth); polarity "falsifies"
honored; manifest checksum extended per CLAUDE.md "Semantic Pack
Discipline"; empty-registry runtime byte-identical to today.
Truth-test pinned: success is the EVAL DELTA, not the artifact
append. PR is "done" when case 0019 (the canary I ratified) admits
under train_sample, train_sample moves from 3 correct / 47 refused
to ≥4 correct / 46 refused, case 0050 stays refused, wrong==0 holds.
This brief is orthogonal to the workbench UI wave (W1..W4); both
can ship in parallel. Recommended operator: Opus (load-bearing
wrong=0 surface; same rigor as CC-2).
Names the wave shape before any implementation. Audits what doctrine
has already settled (ADR-0160 stack pins + read-only trust boundary;
ADR-0162 design system + 15-component must-ship list + no-go list),
catalogs the current state (backend complete, frontend zero), surfaces
the five operator pain points sourced from the 2026-05-27 demo and the
CompositionClaim brief pack, and proposes a five-wave sequence:
W0 (docs) — Trust-boundary ratchet ADR (ADR-0173 working title)
admitting operator ratification through the workbench,
scoped to existing Tier 1.5 handlers (Lexical / Frame /
Composition) and pinning the keyboard contract.
W1 (base) — workbench-ui/ scaffold per ADR-0162 Branch 1.
W2 (read) — ProposalQueue + ProposalCard + ProposalDetailPanel.
W3 (act) — RatificationCommandPanel + handler dispatch (the
throughput multiplier).
W4 (verify)— TraceDrawer + ReplayTheater + EvalCenter.
Guardrails enumerated: CLAUDE.md docs discipline, ADR-0162 no-go list,
determinism, trust boundary, wrong==0, case 0050 hazard pin,
keyboard-first, accessibility, local-first, no engine_state writes
outside the checkpoint path.
Open questions (in-process vs out-of-process ratification, single- vs
multi-operator, telemetry path, font/icon bundling, build artifact
location) listed for W0 resolution. No code in this brief.
* docs(tier1.5+tier2): FrameClaim handler + Tier 2 W5 schema brief pack
Two parallel briefs ready for dispatch:
- F1: FrameClaim ratification handler (Opus) — implements ADR-0168 +
ADR-0168.1; turns 2 of 8 Tier 1 proposals into real GSM8K
admissions on ratify
- T2-W5: MathReaderInferenceProposal schema (Sonnet) — Tier 2 substrate
with two-arm test-and-learn type contract
Zero file overlap between briefs; safe to dispatch concurrently. W6+
deferred until FrameClaim is live (Arm 2 known-good preservation needs
a working handler to verify against).
* docs(briefs): correct pack + workbench paths in Tier 1.5/Tier 2 brief
Operator dispatching F1 (PR #389) discovered:
- Pack path is language_packs/data/en_core_math_v1/, not packs/en_core_math_v1/
- Workbench dispatch table lives in workbench/readers.py, not workbench/api.py
Both operators landed on the correct locations regardless. Folding the
corrections into #387 directly so future operators reading the brief
get the real paths.
The brief pack referenced `teaching/audit_evidence.py` in 3 spots
(A2 schema field, A2 read-required list, B2 algorithm step 3a). The
actual module on main is `teaching/math_evidence.py` (carries
`MathReaderRefusalEvidence` per ADR-0167).
Sonnet (A2 / PR #380) discovered the discrepancy and correctly used
the real module. This patch corrects the brief so Wave B operators
(B1 / B2) do not hit the same gap on dispatch.
No runtime change. Pure docs.
Coordination artifact for ADR-0172 Tier 1 dispatch. Six PRs in the
ADR (W0, W0.1, W1, W2, W3, W4) collapsed into a 4-wave DAG with two
concurrent briefs per wave A and B.
Operators are dispatched in their own UIs by pointing at the
section heading — "read §Brief A1" etc. Bundling options A/B/C
inside the doc let the operator choose CI economy vs wall-clock.
No runtime change. Pure docs.
Three concrete cleanup items from the day's work, per the
cleanup-as-you-find memory principle.
## 1. Remove inject_rate_with_currency stub
PR #369 (A2 rate_with_currency) shipped a function that always returns
() with an extensive docstring documenting the Rate-not-in-SentenceChoice
schema gap. The function is dead at runtime — `_INJECTORS.get(category)`
returning None has the same downstream behavior as the function
returning (). The 16 tests pinned the empty-tuple return; the case-0050
hazard pin is duplicated in test_recognizer_skip_wrong_zero.py and
test_brief_11b_step2_lexicon.py.
The schema gap is now properly documented in ADR-0170 (PR #372). A
dispatch-table comment at the removal site retains the at-code pointer
to that ADR for anyone wiring a new injector.
Removed:
- `inject_rate_with_currency` function in generate/recognizer_anchor_inject.py
- Its `_INJECTORS` dispatch table entry
- Its `__all__` export
- tests/test_injector_rate_with_currency.py (371 lines, 16 tests)
## 2. Remove docs/handoff/GPT55-MOBILE-DISPATCH.md
Single-session travel-time scaffolding. The 5 tasks it named are
complete or superseded by ADR-0170's findings. Pure historical artifact.
## 3. Remove docs/handoff/WAVE-NEXT-INJECTORS.md
Superseded by docs/handoff/WAVE-NEXT-REVISED.md, which captures
everything load-bearing from the original brief in its A1–A4 findings
table. The "kept for history" justification didn't survive scrutiny:
the document was misframed (over-promised lift; misframed schema work
as injector work). Lessons captured in REVISED + ADR-0170.
Updated cross-references:
- WAVE-NEXT-REVISED.md: removed the "supersedes ... kept for history"
pointer; tightened cross-reference list
- ADR-0167-FOLLOWUPS.md §7: rewrote pointer to name ADR-0170 + REVISED
as the live plan rather than "the original is retained"
## Test plan
- 219 tests passed across G.2/G.4/G.5/S1/Brief 11/B1/B11A/wiring/partition/DCS-D.2
- evals/gsm8k_math/train_sample/v1/report.json untouched (regen
surfaces a separate stale-baseline test issue — out of cleanup scope)
- No runtime behavior change
## Net impact
- 5 files removed (~1200 lines)
- 1 file modified for explanatory comment (~30 lines)
- 2 doc files updated to remove dangling cross-references
- 0 behavioral change
DCS-S1 (proper-noun possession sub-shape expansion) investigation
revealed that the recognizer-injector path's `CandidateInitial`-only
return type is a substrate-level constraint blocking four Wave-Next
sub-shape categories — not just one.
## Two artifacts
1. **`docs/handoff/DCS-S1-FINDING.md`** — investigation result. Of
the 21 DCS-refused GSM8K cases, zero are pure S1-only blockers.
Acquisition-verb expansion (`collected`, etc.) conflicts with
ADR-0131.G.1's branch-disagreement discipline. The right fix is
the DCS injector emitting `CandidateOperation(add)`, but the
`inject_from_match` return type doesn't allow that.
2. **`docs/decisions/ADR-0170-injector-contract-widening.md`** —
scoping ADR. Names the contract change, the four categories it
unblocks (DCS-S1 acquisition, A1 currency, A3 multiplicative,
A4 temporal), the three load-bearing rules it must preserve
(ADR-0131.G.1, SentenceChoice union, admissibility gates), and
a 5-step implementation outline.
## Pattern recognised
Wave-Next surfaced four schema gaps. All four trace to the same
constraint: per-category injectors can only emit `CandidateInitial`.
The right next-capability work is ADR-0170 ratification, then a
small no-behavior-change PR widening the contract, then per-injector
follow-up PRs against the widened contract.
That is the actual lift-per-risk path for GSM8K Round-1 closure.
## Test plan
Docs-only. No code, no test, no eval, no pack change.
## Cross-references
- ADR-0163.D.2 — original parsed_anchors → solver-state ADR
- ADR-0131.G.1 — branch-disagreement discipline ADR-0170 preserves
- ADR-0167 — parallel teaching-corridor mechanism (independent)
- ADR-0167-FOLLOWUPS §7 — Wave-Next findings backlog
- WAVE-NEXT-REVISED — parent plan; ADR-0170 is the upstream blocker
- PR #369 — A2's schema-refusal artifact (first observation of gap)
The Wave-Next injector dispatch (A1-A4) surfaced findings that
invalidate three of the four briefs' lift assumptions:
- A1 currency_amount — sandbox-blocked; real lift potential intact
- A2 rate_with_currency — schema gap (Rate not in SentenceChoice
union); PR #369 documents the gap with concrete 4-step plan
- A3 multiplicative_aggregation — Operation(multiply) spec wrong;
correct emission is CandidateInitial(outer×inner); zero GSM8K cases
match canonical narrow form anyway
- A4 temporal_aggregation — needs apply_rate primitive not in algebra
Three of four are schema-extension ADRs masquerading as injector work.
Only A1 is a true injector + sandbox-fix scenario.
Deliverables:
1. `docs/handoff/WAVE-NEXT-REVISED.md` (new) — supersedes
WAVE-NEXT-INJECTORS.md. Pivots to DCS sub-shape expansion as the
actually-tractable next wave (21-case bucket, existing v1 injector,
#366 spec on main). Captures the three schema gaps + A1's
preserved lift potential for separate ADR work.
2. `docs/handoff/ADR-0167-FOLLOWUPS.md` §7 (new) — points to the
revised plan and summarises the four findings inline.
WAVE-NEXT-INJECTORS.md retained for history.
No code change. No runtime effect. Docs-only.
Five docs-only tasks GPT-5.5 can pick up via the GitHub connector while
the operator travels. Every task is read-only execution: spec / audit /
ADR drafting, never code or test changes. Risk profile: zero.
Tasks (each opens one PR):
1. ADR-0168 FrameClaim scoping draft (highest priority — next gate
after the LexicalClaim slice)
2. discrete_count_statement injector specification audit (highest-
leverage: 21/47 GSM8K refusals are this category)
3. Ratified-recognizer registry audit (informs Task 2 and future
injector work)
4. FOLLOWUPS §6 holonomy ablation test specification
5. Cognition contemplation partition fix specification (FOLLOWUPS §5a)
Each task carries:
- Files to read first (with paths)
- Deliverable shape (what the output doc must contain)
- PR body requirements
- Explicit out-of-scope list
Hard constraints enforced for the mobile-connector mode:
- One PR per task; explicit file staging; never git add -A
- Markdown-only (CLAUDE.md §Documentation Discipline)
- No code edits — flag in PR body if a task starts needing one
- No engine_state/ commits
- Cite filenames + line numbers; verify before committing
If all five complete, GPT-5.5 opens a meta-PR linking them into
ADR-0167-FOLLOWUPS.
No code change. No runtime effect. Docs-only.
Three small surgical anchors capturing the verified architectural
insight surfaced during the ADR-0167 wave (no new ADR — the gap claim
that prompted this resolved on verification; what remains is a sharper
residual question worth memorialising).
1. CLAUDE.md — new "Schema-Defined Proof Obligations" section between
Documentation Discipline and Validation Through CLI. Generalises
the wrong=0 invariant pattern: schema types that name structural
properties are real only when an executing test can meaningfully
fail under the violations it is written to catch. Three-step rule
for treating a schema as load-bearing.
2. language_packs/compiler.py — ARCHITECTURAL INVARIANT comment on
_apply_mounted_primary_domain_resonance naming it as the single
convergence-decision site for DEPTH_ROOT/DEPTH_RELATION packs.
Anchors the doctrine at the code site so any future modification
trips on the reference to the holonomy proof's coverage gap.
3. docs/handoff/ADR-0167-FOLLOWUPS.md §6 — captures the structural-vs-
blend convergence isolation question. HolonomyAlignmentCase IS
executed today (we verified), but the existing test doesn't
distinguish structurally-derived convergence from blend-induced
convergence. Ablation test or reframed claim — both acceptable
resolutions.
Verified before commit:
- All 13 architectural references in the Gemini analysis resolve
exactly: triliteral 0.30, root 0.40, prefix 0.03/(idx+1), stem 0.24,
_INFLECTION_PRIORITY case-near-last, _apply_mounted_primary_domain_resonance
with 40% English-prototype blend, HolonomyAlignmentCase defined
AND executed
- tests/test_alignment_graph.py: 8 passed (no behavioural change)
- Documentation discipline (#355) honoured: pure Markdown, no HTML
No code behaviour changes. No runtime effect. Drops the larger
ADR-0168-PROPOSAL idea — the gap claim that prompted it dissolved
under verification.
Captures the named follow-ups that surfaced during the ADR-0167 wave so
they don't drift. Five items, each with scope / why-deferred /
breadcrumbs / acceptance criterion:
1. Frame-opener sub-types (FrameClaim / CompositionClaim / ReferenceClaim
/ SlotClaim) — four additional handlers, each its own ADR
2. Partition test architectural fix — current git-status-at-test-runtime
assertion is structurally brittle (3 options outlined)
3. Two pre-existing main failures (test_unparseable_statement,
test_audit_real_corpus_runs_clean) — fix or quarantine, don't ignore
4. Workbench v1 math-candidate rendering — ADR-0167 §Q4
5. Cross-domain partition risks Gemini flagged (contemplation pack
indexing, replay gate default)
Includes leverage-based sequencing recommendation (no timelines per
project convention).
Docs-only. No code, no test, no eval, no pack change.
Two docs-only updates capturing the day's work:
1. Appended a "Status update — 2026-05-27 EOD" footer to the Brief 11
handoff doc with the completion table (11A/11B-step-1/11B-step-2
docs+lexicon/11D merged; 11C absorbed into W3-A; 11D candidate E ADR
merged) and the current post-#348 baseline taxonomy.
2. New session doc SESSION-2026-05-27-adr-0167-parallel-dispatch.md
alongside the existing SESSION-2026-05-26-comprehension-reader.md.
Captures the architectural pivot (audit-as-teaching-evidence vs the
rejected refusal-class dispatch table), the parallel-dispatch
experiment (5 operators / 3 waves / 6 PRs), what worked, what
surfaced as load-bearing (case 0050 hazard), and what's deferred.
No code changes. No runtime effect.
* feat(ADR-0167/W1-A): MathReaderRefusalEvidence schema + canonical-bytes
Foundation type for routing comprehension-reader refusals into the
teaching corridor. Frozen dataclass with sha256 evidence_hash computed
from deterministic canonical bytes (mirrors state.to_canonical_bytes
pattern). Includes SUB_TYPE_FOR_OPERATOR mapping table covering all 13
missing_operator values in the current audit artifact.
Wave 1 only — no runtime mutation, no teaching-store integration, no
admission path. Downstream W2-A/B/C/D type-import from this module.
* feat(ADR-0167/W2-C): domain discriminator + cross-domain audit
- Links to the audit doc: docs/handoff/ADR-0167-W2C-cross-domain-audit.md
- Inventory details: 5 construction sites, 8 consumption sites
- Verification: 0 cognition test files were modified; all tests are green
- Downstream partition work flagged: contemplation indexing (in teaching/contemplation.py) and replay gate (in teaching/proposals.py)
* docs(ADR-0167): audit-as-teaching-evidence (math reader → contemplation wire)
Scoping ADR for Brief 11D Candidate E. Routes math-reader refusal audit
rows into the existing contemplation/HITL teaching corridor as a new
candidate source (`MathReaderRefusalEvidence`).
Key decisions:
- Evidence-only — never directly admits a math fact; only ratification
through HITL queue can change runtime behaviour
- Five sub-types proposed (Lexical / Frame / Composition / Reference /
Slot claims) mapping to the audit taxonomy
- Scope first to LexicalClaim — lowest-risk, highest-count
- Six open questions called out for the implementation ADR
ADR-0166 three-question test passes; implementation passes only when
the six open questions are answered with LexicalClaim-first scope.
No code in this PR.
* docs(ADR-0167): parallel work plan — 6-PR/3-wave dispatch across 5 model operators
Brief 1 scopes the PR #97 follow-up: flip `definitional_layer` to false on
the three new domain seed packs (en_mathematics_logic_v1 / en_physics_v1 /
en_systems_software_v1) so the ADR-0084 closure verifier stops flagging
them as malformed. They're governed by ADR-0091 `domain_contract_version`,
which is a different layer; the integration test's allowlist already
excludes them, so the flag-flip aligns the script with the test's
clearly-intended scope.
Brief 2 scopes ADR-0073 L1.1 content phase II: extend the grc/he anchor-lens
substrate with 8 cross-language lemma pairs (νοῦς ↔ בינה / διάνοια /
καρδία ↔ לב / ψυχή ↔ נפש / ἔλεος / εἰρήνη / δικαιοσύνη / ἅγιος ↔ קדוש)
authored against the L1.1 file shapes, alignment edge weights, and
en-collapse annotation discipline. Anchor-lens-tour seam claims and
cognition-eval byte-identity under unanchored default remain the gates.
Both briefs are bounded to content authoring; neither touches code.
Follow-up brief for the cheaper dev agent. Scoped tight: ~18 concrete
row-by-row edits across two patterns the v1 pass (PR #73) deferred or
missed.
Pattern A — 3sg present-tense agreement after relative pronouns
what/who/that/which followed by a bare-form verb where the implied
subject is singular. 10 candidates identified up front by repo scan:
- en_core_causation_v1/effect (with judgment note)
- en_core_cognition_v1/beginning, creation, definition, evidence,
light, reason, symbol
- en_core_meta_v1/example, mind
Brief explicitly clarifies that bare verbs after modals (`can`,
`may`, `should`) are CORRECT and must NOT be changed — flagging
the "who can know and do" case the v1 agent did right.
Pattern B — plural agreement after quantifier / preposition
between/among/of/two/three/many + count-noun-in-singular. 5
confident edits + 3 borderline cases with judgment guidance:
- en_core_attitude_v1/broad
- en_core_cognition_v1/context, order, style
- en_core_spatial_v1/between
Borderline guidance distinguishes count vs mass nouns: `reason`
in "group of reason" is count (apply fix); `reason` in "because
of reason" is mass (leave alone).
Same hard rules as v1 brief:
- no code edits
- definitional_atoms / predicates_invited / pos / lemma /
definition_version must not change
- Greek/Hebrew packs and primitives pack untouched
- closure verifier must exit 0
- cognition eval must stay byte-identical
- draft PR, human review before merge
Estimated effort: ~18 one-character edits. Whole pass should take an
order of magnitude less time than v1 because the candidate rows are
enumerated in the brief itself rather than discovered via heuristic
scan.
Why a v2 brief rather than amending v1's PR:
Plural patterns were not on v1's explicit pattern list (the v1
brief only named verb agreement, missing articles, missing
infinitives, missing copulas). 3sg agreement was named but
required a different tool than the agent had at hand. Scoping
v2 to exactly the rows known to need fixing is cheaper than
re-running the v1 heuristic scan with an expanded ruleset.
Provenance tag for the v2 pass:
adr-0085-style-v2:reviewed:2026-05-22
Brief for a fluency pass on the 333 ratified gloss entries. Closes the
content-side counterpart of ADR-0085's surface lift:
Before "Light exists as visible medium that reveal truth."
After "Light exists as a visible medium that reveals truth."
Same gloss content, English-correct. Fixes 3sg agreement after
relative clauses, plural agreement after quantifiers, missing
articles before adjective-noun NOUN-frame glosses, and missing 'to'
in VERB-frame glosses.
Hard constraints encoded in the brief (matching the wrapper-prompt
pattern that worked for ADR-0084 content):
- code untouched: only language_packs/data/<pack>/glosses.jsonl edits
- definitional_atoms, predicates_invited, pos, lemma, definition_version
must NOT change
- closure verifier (scripts/verify_definitional_closure.py) must
still exit 0
- cognition eval must stay byte-identical to baseline
- Greek/Hebrew packs untouched (not in definitional layer per ADR-0084
scope limit)
- primitives pack untouched
- draft PR, human review before merge
Includes a Phase-1 inventory script the agent runs first to scope the
work (heuristic pattern matcher across the 13 opted-in packs),
worked-example fluency rules with before/after table, per-pack
checksum-refresh shell snippet, and Phase-4 verification commands.
Estimated effort: ~30-60 lines of JSONL edits. Same handoff format as
docs/handoff/ADR-0084-pack-content-brief.md.
* docs(adr-0084): propose definitional layer + prompt-diversity suite
Three companion artifacts proposing the next substantive design step
after ADR-0083:
1. ADR-0084 (Proposed) — Definitional Layer for Lexicon Packs
Optional `definition` block on pack entries: gloss,
definitional_atoms, predicates_invited, definition_version,
provenance. Pack-level opt-in. Closure rule: every word in a
gloss must resolve to a same-pack lemma, another mounted pack's
lemma, or a primitive in a new `packs/primitives/` pack.
NO composer change in this ADR (sequenced for ADR-0085) —
ratify substrate before any consumer depends on it.
2. evals/prompt_diversity/ (Proposed) — companion eval lane
~50 cases across question-shape × sophistication × domain,
measuring three new metrics: response_shape_fit,
audit_in_surface_rate (quantifies the trust-boundary leak into
user surfaces), gloss_quote_rate (zero today; rises with future
gloss-aware composer). No v1 pass thresholds — the lane
establishes a baseline distribution so future work has
something to move. 26 seed cases authored covering all 21
categories.
3. docs/handoff/ADR-0084-pack-content-brief.md — paste-ready brief
for a cheaper/faster dev agent to produce the pack content in
parallel. Self-contained, 5 sequenced phases (primitives pack
→ extend 9 existing glosses → add to relations/anchors → write
closure verifier → run safety lanes), explicit don't-touch list
(no composer / runtime / algebra / Greek+Hebrew packs / schema
parser), no-LLM-glosses discipline, per-phase acceptance.
Discovery while drafting: 9 packs already carry glosses.jsonl
under language_packs/data/ with a flat schema (78 entries in
en_core_cognition_v1 alone). The brief reflects that — most
work is extending existing entries, not authoring from scratch.
Strategic context: ADR-0083 raised the *depth* ceiling on chain
composition; ADR-0084 raises the *fidelity* ceiling. The φ
separation probe (memory: phi-separation-falsified) established
that semantic capability lives in chain composition, not in φ
geometry, so deepening the composer's substrate is the natural
next step. ADR-0084 → 0085 (gloss-aware composer) → 0086
(predicate licensing at ratification) is the planned sequence.
* feat(adr-0084): substrate — schema parser, primitives loader, closure verifier
Substrate-only code-side for ADR-0084 (Definitional Layer for Lexicon Packs).
No composer touches the new fields yet; consumer integration is ADR-0085.
Schema (additive, default preserves byte-identity)
- LanguagePackManifest.definitional_layer: bool = False
- compiler loader propagates the flag from manifest.json
language_packs/definitions.py (new)
- GlossEntry dataclass: lemma, gloss, pos, definitional_atoms,
predicates_invited, definition_version, provenance_ids
- parse_gloss_entry(payload, *, strict) — strict mode enforces ADR-0084
§Schema validation row-by-row: required keys, typed lists, no
unknown keys, positive definition_version; lax mode preserves the
legacy two-field shape for back-compat
- load_pack_glosses(pack_id, *, strict) with cache + clear hook
- verify_definitional_closure(pack_id, *, mounted_pack_lemmas,
primitive_lemmas, strict) returning tuple[ClosureViolation, ...];
case-insensitive resolution; cycles permitted per ADR
packs/primitives/loader.py (new)
- Sister loader to packs/safety/ and packs/identity/
- PrimitivesPack frozen dataclass with .lemmas frozenset
- Gates: checksum match, kind=='primitives', definitional_layer:true,
never_auto_mutable:true, pack_id matches dir, primitive_count
cross-check, duplicate-lemma rejection, path-traversal rejection,
strict per-entry schema with allow-list
- DEFAULT_PRIMITIVES_PACK = 'en_semantic_primitives_v1'
tests/test_adr_0084_definitional_substrate.py
- 38 tests covering strict parser (each required key rejection, unknown
key rejection, empty predicates_invited allowed, empty
definitional_atoms rejected, invalid definition_version), lax
parser back-compat, load_pack_glosses (missing/strict raise/lax
skip/malformed JSON), closure verifier (same-pack/primitive/mounted/
unresolved/case-insensitive), primitives loader (every gate), and
a back-compat check that every shipped pack still ratifies with
definitional_layer=False
Lanes: smoke 67/0, cognition 120/0/1, teaching 17/0, runtime 19/0,
packs 6/0. Cognition eval byte-identical 100/91.7/100/100.
When the content PR lands (primitives.jsonl + extended glosses.jsonl
under ADR-0084-pack-content-brief.md), the gate catches any closure-rule
violation without further code change.
* feat(evals): prompt_diversity lane runner — measurement instrument for ADR-0084+
Implements the runner against the existing contract.md + 26-case v1
public split. Lane auto-discovered by evals.framework via the standard
contract + runner convention.
Runner (evals/prompt_diversity/runner.py)
- run_lane(cases, *, config, workers) -> LaneReport
- 5 metrics: intent_accuracy, versor_closure_rate (carried over from
cognition), plus the three new lane-specific metrics —
response_shape_fit, audit_in_surface_rate, gloss_quote_rate
- breakdown dict groups by (question_shape, sophistication, domain)
per contract §How to read the output
- mirrors evals.cognition.runner's parallel worker pattern
Per-shape classifier (deliberately substring/regex-simple at v1)
- predicate_identity, explanation, sequence, two_subject_contrast,
narrative, honest_disclosure
- Unknown shape => neutral pass (don't penalise new categories)
Audit-leak detector
- trust-boundary preamble markers (teaching-grounded (, pack-grounded
(, No session evidence yet.)
- dotted semantic-domain tag regex (cognition.illumination, etc.)
Gloss-quote detector
- resolves expected_terms via chat.pack_resolver.resolve_gloss
- 4-token contiguous-window match against surface (high-confidence
"gloss actually quoted", not "shared one common word")
Tests (tests/test_prompt_diversity_runner.py — 23)
- shape classifier parametrized over the six expected_shape values
- audit-leak detector parametrized over preamble + tag + clean cases
- end-to-end on v1 public:
* versor_closure_rate == 1.0 (only v1 pass threshold per contract)
* every metric in [0, 1]
* breakdown groups present with the four per-cell metrics
* diversity gate: >=5 question shapes, >=3 domains
(defends against future regressions that collapse the suite
back to a cognition-shaped fixture)
v1/public baseline (26 cases)
intent_accuracy : 65.4% (contract predicted 70-85%)
versor_closure_rate : 100.0% (only v1 pass threshold) PASS
response_shape_fit : 53.8% (contract predicted low)
audit_in_surface_rate: 42.3% (contract predicted ~100%)
gloss_quote_rate : 7.7% (contract predicted 0%)
Three baseline surprises worth noting in the report (NOT failures —
the v1 lane is explicitly there to establish the distribution):
- audit_in_surface_rate at 42% (not 100%) means the chain-walk leak
fires on ~11/26; the other 15 are honest-disclosure cases that
emit no audit envelope. Sharpens the future surface-vs-envelope
ADR's actual target: grounded surfaces specifically.
- response_shape_fit at 54% (not "low") — classifier likely has
false positives on the ", which " cause-marker. Worth tightening
once we have an ADR-0085 baseline to compare against.
- intent_accuracy at 65% (below predicted 70-85%) — classifier dips
harder on adversarial/cross-pack than expected. Real gap.
All five smoke/cognition/teaching/runtime/packs lanes still green;
core eval cognition byte-identical 100/91.7/100/100.
* feat(packs): ADR-0084 pack content (primitives + extend glosses + closure verifier) (#65)
* feat(packs): ADR-0084 pack content
* feat(packs): repair ADR-0084 definitional content
* test(adr-0084): adjust substrate manifest tests for post-#65 content reality
PR #65 flipped definitional_layer:true on 13 English packs (9 core +
4 relations + collapse-anchors). The substrate's previous test
test_existing_packs_unchanged asserted that en_core_cognition_v1 +
en_core_relations_v1 still had definitional_layer:False — which was
the right pre-content invariant but is wrong post-content.
Replace it with two complementary tests that hold against real content:
- test_non_opted_packs_default_false:
pins that packs that DIDN'T flip the flag (en_minimal_v1,
he_core_cognition_v1, grc_logos_cognition_v1) still surface
definitional_layer=False through the loader. Defends against
a future change accidentally flipping the flag on a non-opted
pack.
- test_opted_packs_carry_flag:
pins that packs that DID flip the flag (en_core_cognition_v1,
en_core_relations_v1) surface definitional_layer=True through
the loader. Proves the substrate's manifest-field propagation
works against real ratified content, not just fixture packs.
Net: +1 test, same intent (substrate ratifies the manifest field
correctly), now with real-content coverage on both sides of the gate.
All 62 ADR-0084 substrate + prompt-diversity tests pass.
