Phase 2.3: the first inference rule + the wrong=0 mechanism for proofs.
- generate/proof_chain/rules.py: evaluate_modus_ponens / evaluate_proof_conclusion.
Proof-layer dispatch (Option B) over proposition FORMULAS via the canonicalizer;
never touches check_admissibility/_resolve_dep_units (proofs have no units).
Disagreement rule = the select_self_verified twin: pool ALL admissible single-step
MP derivations, require a unique canonical key == declared conclusion. Pooling (not
filter-to-declared-first) is the soundness mechanism.
- generate/logic_canonical.py: parse_top_implication (+ _unparse) — recovers an
implication's syntactic antecedent/consequent (the ROBDD form doesn't preserve it).
- Closed typed-reason set; the corpus's finer labels consolidate (6 disagreement
refuse-labels -> conclusion_disagreement; 4 antecedent-flavor labels ->
unestablished_antecedent — same redundancy, same mechanism-makes-one-distinction
principle).
- Honesty boundary (exact scope): guarantees a unique conclusion among SINGLE-STEP MP
over the premises, NOT "uniquely entailed" by all strategies.
Cross-check: all 24 GPT-5.5 adversarial corpus cases agree on OUTCOME against the real
rule (no rule bug / no corpus outcome-misread); reasons consolidate as above.
Mutation: filter-to-declared-first makes DISAGREE-007/010 wrongly admit -> pooling
tests fail (pooling load-bearing).
Drive-by fix (cleanup-as-you-find): merged ADR-0204 ProofNode.__post_init__ was
dedented to module level -> all ProofNode validation was silently DEAD (smoke skips
the dedicated test file; the smoke != full-suite hazard). Re-indented; validation
restored.
Additive (math lane untouched). Full binding-graph surface green; smoke 67.
Phase 2.2, structure only (no inference rule — modus_ponens is 2.3). Translates a
Proof into a SemanticSymbolicBindingGraph; the ADR-0203 acyclicity guard + ADR-0132
referential integrity fire at construction.
- generate/proof_chain/model.py: the one canonical proof input shape (ProofNode/Proof
+ proof_from_premises desugaring of the corpus premises/conclusion shape).
- generate/proof_chain/builder.py: build_proof_graph — node→symbol+equation;
canonical_key→rhs_canonical, depends_on→dependencies, rule→operation_kind;
premises = empty-deps/op="premise"; unit_proof=PROOF_NO_UNIT, admissibility="pending";
conclusion tracked as conclusion_symbol_id.
- tests: 9 — valid DAG (PC-MP-001 desugared) + multistep construct; PC-CYCLE-001
refuses THROUGH the real builder (circular_dependency); canonical_key round-trips
byte-identical + equivalent formulas share rhs_canonical; admissibility-dispatch
confirmation; self/dangling refusals; out-of-regime node refuses. Mutation-verified
(drop dep-wiring -> cycle admitted -> test fails).
Admissibility dispatch confirmed graceful on proof operation_kinds: unknown kinds
-> AdmissibilityError(unknown_operation), unitless deps -> unit_unbound; NEVER
misroutes into _check_additive. Named 2.3 constraint: check_admissibility runs
_resolve_dep_units before dispatch, so modus_ponens must bypass unit-resolution.
Open items named for 2.3 (ADR-0204): conclusion typing (BoundUnknown revisit),
semantic_role="unknown" (closed vocab has no "proposition"), unit_proof sentinel.
Additive (first consumer; math lane untouched). Full binding-graph surface green;
smoke 67. Honesty boundary: through 2.3, sound over declared atoms, not grounded in input.
GPT-5.5's independent corpus caught that the canonicalizer refused quantified/
predicate input only by accident (tokenizer chokes on '.'), not by design — a
by-luck-not-by-design refusal the wrong=0 discipline rejects. ADR-0202 §3 names a
typed `out_of_decidable_regime` refusal; the keystone emitted a generic grammar error.
- logic_canonical.py: LogicRegimeError(LogicError) + OUT_OF_DECIDABLE_REGIME;
_reject_out_of_regime_text (quantifier words forall/exists + symbols ∀/∃, pre-scan)
and _reject_out_of_regime_tokens (predicate-application ATOM-then-LPAREN), run BEFORE
the generic grammar error. Refusal only — no predicate/FOL capability added.
- logic_equivalence.py: typed regime branch (before the generic LogicError branch).
- tests: 43 total (10 new) — OOR refuses with typed reason; equivalence path too;
genuine grammar errors stay plain LogicError (no over-fire); `not (P)` not mistaken
for predicate application. Mutation-verified by-design (neuter -> falls through to
generic grammar error).
- ADR-0201.1: additive sub-ADR of 0201 (not an amendment; sub-number preserves the
landed ADR-0203 forward refs + phase-2 plan numbering). Honesty boundary load-bearing.
Corpus now 22/22 (PC-OOR-001/002 agree on the principled reason). Full canonicalizer
suite green; smoke 67 passed. modus_ponens rule-reasons remain deferred to ADR-0205 (2.3).
proof_chain phase 2.1: the acyclicity guard at the shared binding-graph
construction boundary, before phase 2.2 wiring can build a cyclic-capable structure.
- generate/binding_graph/acyclicity.py: pure find_cycle(adjacency) detector
(deterministic three-colour DFS; isolated, no model import).
- model.py __post_init__: builds {lhs: deps} adjacency over equations and raises
BindingGraphError(circular_dependency ...) on a cycle. Runs on every binding
graph (math + future proof) — illegal states unrepresentable for all consumers.
- tests/test_binding_graph_acyclicity.py: 17 tests (pure checker + construction
enforcement); mutation-verified non-vacuous.
- ADR-0203: new ADDITIVE invariant referencing ADR-0132 (not an amendment —
preserves the why-added-later history).
Math-lane regression proof: the only producer (math adapter) is acyclic by
construction (fresh result symbol per op, deps point backward); full
binding-graph + admissibility surface 392 green; guard refuses no existing graph.
Honesty boundary (load-bearing): through phase 2.3, proof_chain is SOUND OVER
DECLARED ATOMS, not grounded in recognized input (grounding is phase 2.4).
full binding-graph/admissibility surface: 392 passed. smoke: 67 passed.
1-page exec + backing brief for a first technical conversation, written to
survive a skeptical CTO. Every number/status sourced to docs/claims_ledger.md;
substrate-beneath-BrainOS framing held (not perception/motor); verify block is
fresh-clone-green. Prepared for internal review — not for distribution.
Reconcile every artifact that asserted the (since auto-reverted) mathematics_logic
expert promotion to the live machine state. Determinism proven intact (Week-1a):
the digest divergence is genuine single-source evidence-drift (GSM8K coverage probe
3/47 -> 4/46 via #310/#488), not a non-determinism defect. ADR-0120's fail-closed
property fired as designed; CORE revoked its own expert claim.
History keeps receipts; current-state reconciles to truth:
- Regenerate expert_claims_math_v1_signed.json -> promote_admitted:false,
reviewer_signature_matches:false, digest 02f6d3c8.
- reviewers.yaml math_expert_claims: quarantine note; entry kept (mismatch-refusal
keeps firing); intentionally NOT re-signed.
- ADR-0120-math-expert-ledger-flip: dated valid-at/auto-reverted header note.
- README: "next gate" narrative -> built-attempted-reverted; refresh stale count.
- docs/decisions/README: revert note + ADR-0200 index row.
- 3 fail-closed tests (2 files): "is-expert" -> fail-closed-revert assertions.
Were RED on main; now green (30 passed).
No eval gate, threshold, or safety boundary changed.
Add docs/claims_ledger.md (every public claim -> in-repo evidence, with the
four GSM8K numbers separated and labeled) and ADR-0200 recording the
mathematics_logic expert fail-closed revert as designed behavior (proven
single-source evidence-drift; determinism intact).
Additive only: no existing claim, eval gate, or test is touched. The
review-gated reconciliation diffs (reviewers.yaml quarantine note, ADR-0120
header note, signed-JSON regen, README narrative, 3 test reconciliations) are
listed in ADR-0200 section 4 and await operator ratification.
The decisions README index table stopped at ADR-0183 then jumped to
ADR-0196, omitting every top-level ADR that landed in between plus the
three newest. PRs #513/#514/#515 added ADR-0197/0198/0199 files without
touching the index; the 0184-0195 gap predates them.
Adds 12 rows in numeric order with title + status pulled from each ADR
header. No content/runtime change; pure index backfill.
- files-vs-index drift check: now empty (was 12)
- all 12 new link targets verified to resolve
Single portable 'where we are / what's next' page for the Zig native-substrate
work: gate status per component, the locked G1 CRDT contract, the immediate
next action (a new ADR to clear G2 before any Zig code), env gotchas
(PYO3_PYTHON=3.12; the public_demo wall-clock lane flake), and verification
commands. Lets any operator/agent resume cold.
Sibling links resolve once #509 (docs/zig/**) lands on main; merge #509 first.
Establishes the canonical Delta-CRDT reference contract so a future native
(Rust/Zig) backend is gate-G1-eligible under ADR-0196 — the ZC-0 'contract
pinning' slice. No Zig code; ZC-1+ remains gated at G2.
- vault/crdt.py: canonical Python reference (ArenaEntry, Delta, LocalArena,
merge_kernel, canonical_bytes, delta_hash). Pure content law — content-
addressed by IEEE-754 bits then provenance; no normalization, no versor
closure, no global Vault writes.
- ZC-0 contract tests (semilattice C-1..C-5; content ordering / signed-zero /
NaN bit-addressing; C-7 no-global-write) — all failable (mutation-checked:
no-dedup breaks C3/C5, arrival-order breaks C1).
- Golden fixture corpus (tests/fixtures/crdt/) regenerated deterministically
from the reference; single source of truth also emits the Rust expected hex.
- core-rs: Delta::canonical_bytes + test_crdt_hash_parity.rs proving Rust
produces byte-identical canonical_bytes to the Python reference.
- ADR-0180 -> Accepted: locked contract, byte layout, obligation map, and the
explicit boundary that no Zig is authorized.
Verification: ZC-0 21 passed, Rust arena+parity 16 passed, architectural
invariants 40 passed, smoke 67 passed. Serving frozen: 7/8 lane SHAs match;
the public_demo miss is a pre-existing wall-clock budget overrun (ADR-0099,
~46-48s > 30s) reproduced identically on clean main — environmental.
First foundation-curriculum substrate pack: 24 reviewed noun lemmas for
syntax/claim/provenance vocabulary (subject, predicate, agent_role,
clause, antecedent, consequent_role, polarity, negation, evidence_span,
…). Substrate only — no parser, no runtime generation change.
This is the clean reland of #503 (merged then reverted via #508 for
shipping two failing tests). Root cause of the revert was lemma
collision: the smoke CI gate does not collect dedicated test files, so
the pack merged green while its own test asserted resolver routings that
were false.
Reland fixes, with the full collision audit done against every on-disk
pack (not just the one the original author checked):
- agent -> agent_role (bare `agent` owned by en_core_meta_v1)
- comparison -> comparison_relation(bare `comparison` owned by en_core_cognition_v1)
- consequent -> consequent_role (bare `consequent` owned by en_core_causation_v1)
- negation kept bare on purpose: no *mounted* pack owned it
(en_mathematics_logic_v1 is a domain pack, not in
DEFAULT_RESOLVABLE_PACK_IDS), so mounting syntax now grounds a word
that previously returned None. Renaming would have lost grounding.
The original test also mis-asserted prior resolution: it claimed
`cause` -> en_core_causation_v1, but first-match-wins resolves it to
en_core_cognition_v1 (mounted at index 0). The test now pins the TRUE
current owner; this pack does not change it.
Resolver: en_core_syntax_v1 mounted after en_core_polarity_v1 and before
en_core_relations_v1 — purely additive, steals no prior resolution.
Evidence:
- tests/test_en_core_syntax_v1_pack.py: 13/13 (was 4 failed, 9 passed)
- pack/resolver/grounding/invariants blast radius: 415 passed
- core test --suite smoke: 67 passed
- core test --suite packs: 1 failed, 140 passed — the single failure
(test_lilibeth_canary_solves_end_to_end, GSM8K candidate-graph reader)
is PRE-EXISTING on clean main f79b647, byte-identical, and untouched by
this PR.
- lane SHAs: 7/8 content-match; the public_demo miss is a wall-clock
DemoContractError (>30s budget), not content drift — serving frozen.
PR checklist:
- Capability: foundation-curriculum language substrate vocabulary.
- Field invariant: pack loads through checksum-sealed compiler; no
algebra/versor path touched.
- Lane: core test --suite packs / smoke; dedicated pack test.
- No hidden normalization, stochastic fallback, approximate recall, or
unreviewed mutation.
- Trust boundary: language-pack loading only; manifest checksums hash the
exact bytes on disk (recomputed after the two renames).
Bring the docs/zig/** decision package and README 'Native Substrate
Direction' section into main, and record ADR-0196 (Accepted) as the
binding ratification.
The doctrine is explicitly NOT a wholesale Zig rewrite. It establishes a
ring architecture (Python = semantic source of truth; Rust = incumbent
algebra backend; Zig = Ring 1 native-substrate candidate only) and the
G0-G8 adoption gate ladder. Zig may enter only by clearing gates against
a locked reference contract; default-by-availability is forbidden.
ADR-0196 forward-references ADR-0180 as the first G1 instantiation (the
CRDT contract lock / ZC-0 slice). No Zig code is authorized.
Execution-free brief for the read-only GitHub-connector lane: comprehension-
primitive inventory, question-layer gap survey, subject-readiness recommendation,
then gated capability-axis/ADR/corpus drafts. Proposal-only; serving stays frozen
(wrong=0, pinned lanes). Companion to the Claude execute/validate/commit lane.
Narrow product promotion boundary (`generate/derivation/product_bridge.py`)
wired into `generate/math_candidate_graph.py`: only complete pure-product
derivations with a product-target question and no known hazard surface lift
from the sealed pooled derivation reader into serving.
- Serving train_sample: 4/46/0 → 6/44/0, wrong=0; case 0050 still refused.
- Renumbered from the collided ADR-0194 (labeled-container, #499) to ADR-0195
and rebased onto current main.
CI: smoke + verify-pinned-lane-SHAs green on the merge commit.
GSM8K labels containers/regions with a trailing single-letter or short-numeric
label ('Jar A has 28 marbles', 'Section G has 10 cars', 'District 2 has 19
voters'); the initial-possession entity slot captured only 'Jar' and the label
broke the match. Adds a separate sibling pattern _INITIAL_HAS_LABELED_RE
(mirroring ADR-0136.S.4 localisation) that REQUIRES the label, so the global
_ENTITY is unchanged and bare subjects yield no duplicate candidate.
- Composes with ADR-0193 aggregate question: 'Jar A has 28 marbles. Jar B has
12 marbles. How many marbles are there in total?' -> 40.0.
- 0 real-corpus metric flip (honest substrate): the one real multi-container
aggregate additionally needs comparative + multiplicative + lowercase-ref.
- wrong=0 HOLDS full corpus (7,473 q); train_sample byte-identical 4/46/0;
synthetic-registry capability-axis gate + G5 lane green; smoke 67 passed.
- Label bounded by the possession verb: multi-word nouns ('Jar Apple') do NOT
match. wrong=0 held downstream by completeness + round-trip + disagreement.
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Extends ADR-0131.G.5's total-across aggregate branch with the existential
verb frame 'How many <unit> are there <cue>?' over the SAME closed cue
vocabulary (no cue-set widening). The solver already sums entity=None
total-across; the wall was purely the question parser's verb-frame coverage.
- Composes end-to-end: 'Jamie has 28 marbles. Kyle has 12 marbles. How many
marbles are there in total?' -> 40.0 (load-bearing, not inert).
- 23 real GSM8K problems now parse the question (advance past the Q-wall to
the statement-parse wall).
- wrong=0 HOLDS on the full 7,473-q corpus; train_sample byte-identical
4/46/0; no metric delta (composition-wall lesson, third instance).
- Cross-ADR discipline: 'What is the total number of <unit>?' is DEFERRED,
not contradicted — ADR-0131.G.5 pins it as a refusal probe; promoting it
must amend that ADR's closed-cue contract. test_total_number_of_still_deferred
locks the boundary.
Firewall: completeness guard (ADR-0191) + question round-trip refuse conjoined
('dogs and cats') and derived ('animal legs') units. G5 lane + synthetic-registry
wrong=0 capability-axis gate green; smoke 67 passed.
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The discrete_count matcher gated the counted noun on a CLOSED ratified set
(observed_counted_nouns): 'Betty has 24 marbles' matched, 'Randy has 60 mango
trees' / 'Sam has 12 red apples' did not — purely because the noun was unseen.
Open the single-anchor possession/acquisition path to an open noun phrase
(adjective* + 1-3 word head, bounded by a stop-word lookahead so it never
swallows a trailing PP), keeping every other narrowness layer (proper-noun
subject, verb whitelist, single numeric token, no clause-split). Closed
observed nouns still match (capitalized compounds preserved); compound
enumeration stays closed.
Safe because ADR-0191 moved the wrong=0 guarantee downstream: an open-vocab
mis-parse hits the completeness guard + round-trip + branch-disagreement.
Proof: full real corpus 61->494 discrete_count anchors (8x), wrong=0 HOLDS,
zero confabulations.
Substrate PR — 0 metric delta by design (train_sample byte-identical 4/46/0;
the problems still need composition downstream). Value: the foundation every
discrete_count flip consumes, and empirical proof open-vocab is firewall-safe.
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* fix(adr-0191): candidate-graph completeness guard — real-corpus wrong 5->0
The candidate-graph reader (serving) checked grounding + round-trip but had
no completeness obligation, so problems whose later clauses failed to parse
emitted a partial reading. Over the full 7,473-question real GSM8K train
split this confabulated 5 answers (wrong!=0) the 47-case train_sample hid;
2 were regressions from #488.
Add the missing admissibility leg (mirrors the derivation reader's verify.py):
every source quantity (all statements + question) must be consumed by the
chosen reading, else refuse. Refusal-only -> cannot create a wrong answer.
Number-sense is pack-authoritative (en_numerics_v1 parse_compound_cardinal +
lookup_multiplier + all 6 currency symbols) so it never disagrees with the
engine; aggregating initials expose consumed_value_tokens provenance.
Evidence: real-corpus wrong 5->0, correct held at 4; train_sample byte-
identical 4/46/0; G1-G5+S1+G3.1 green; smoke 67 passed; math_teaching_corpus
lane byte-identical.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* feat(adr-0191): committed full-corpus GSM8K microscope (standing wrong=0 + coverage instrument)
Promotes the throwaway tmp/ microscope that found the 5 confabulations into a
committed tool. Runs the canonical serving reader over any GSM8K corpus and
reports failures-first: correct/wrong/refused, every wrong answer by name,
refusal families, and the no-injection per-category coverage map that ranks
which injector to build next by real frequency.
Default corpus is the committed 47-case train_sample (always available);
--corpus path runs the full real split. This is the ADR-0191 follow-up: re-run
after every capability PR, not just train_sample — a flip is only real if it
does not widen the confabulation surface.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.
* feat(adr-0189): comparative reading — anchor-verb widening + multi-word units
The candidate-graph comparative extractor (ADR-0131.G.2) read only has/have +
single-word units, so real-GSM8K comparatives ('Brooke does three times as many
jumping jacks as Sidney') didn't parse — a dark statement in 17 places blocking
15 of the 47 refused train_sample cases, despite the ADR-0123 solver already
supporting compare_additive/compare_multiplicative.
Widens the anchor-verb set (reusing legacy vetted lemmas + does/collected/
gained/studied…), EXCLUDING polarity-inverting verbs (lose/spend/give/sell/win)
to preserve wrong=0; admits 1-2 word units via the existing multi-word
_unit_grounds branch. Feeds the existing solver unchanged.
wrong=0 proven: G2_comparatives 29/29, G3 20/0, G4 32/32, train_sample 3/47/0
byte-identical; polarity-inverting verbs proven refused (failing-under-violation).
Chain composes correctly in isolation (146 -> 438). Flips 0 cases ALONE — every
comparative case needs a composing partner (aggregation / multi-word-noun
injection); this ships the component, not yet a flip.
- generate/math_candidate_parser.py: _comparison_anchor_verb widening + 1-2 word
unit slots in the two multiplicative comparative regexes.
- tests/test_adr_0131_G2a_*: 5 tests incl. polarity-inversion wrong=0 guards.
- docs/decisions/ADR-0189: gap, change, wrong=0 evidence, honest scope.
* feat(adr-0189a): first metric move 3/47/0 -> 4/46/0 (case 0024, comprehension-composed)
Case 0024 now SOLVES (answer 438) by composing three general comprehension
capabilities feeding the unchanged ADR-0123 solver:
1. day-of-week count enumeration: Sidney = 20+36+40+50 = 146
(_day_enumeration_candidates; derived sum grounds via first count token,
mirroring _embedded_quantifier; closed to the 7 day names)
2. comparative reading (ADR-0189): Brooke = 3 x Sidney
3. activity question 'How many <unit> did <Entity> <verb>?' (_Q_DID_RE)
Plus do/does/did added to the CandidateInitial anchor whitelist (production-
possession), admitted only via the closed day-enumeration shape.
wrong=0 PROVEN across every lane: all 8 capability axes wrong=0 (G2_comparatives
29/29, G3 20/0, G4 32/32, G5/S1/S3/S4 all pass), train_sample 4/46/0 wrong=0,
verify_lane_shas exit 0 (no pinned lane changed), generate_claims --check OK.
872 tests pass; new tests are failing-under-violation incl. wrong=0 guards
(non-day comma list not summed; polarity-inverting comparative verbs refused).
Re-baselined report.json + train_sample_coverage_report.json (latter also clears
pre-existing reason drift) + CLAIMS.md to the new 4/46/0 metric. Decode-not-guess:
0024 solved by READING its structure, not storing an answer. Remaining pre-existing
failures (G3 committed-report, telemetry) unrelated, fail on pristine main.
- generate/math_candidate_parser.py: day-enum extractor + _Q_DID_RE + does-anchor.
- tests/test_adr_0189a_day_enum_activity.py: 5 tests (incl. end-to-end 0024=438).
- docs/decisions/ADR-0189a + report.json/coverage/CLAIMS re-baseline.
* docs(adr-0186): sealed candidate-graph injector lane (resume ADR-0170 W2-W5 under ADR-0175 seal)
Topology audit found two disjoint GSM8K readers: the candidate-graph reader
owns the official 3/47/0 metric and already has divide/multiply/compare; its
wall is the recognizer->injection coverage gap (ADR-0170 W2-W5 backlog), not
arithmetic. The derivation reader (resolve_pooled) is a separate sealed organ
that cannot reach the goal without an unbuilt Phase-5 bridge.
ADR-0186 reconciles ADR-0170's injector roadmap with ADR-0175's serving seal:
develop W2-W5 injectors behind a default-off 'sealed' flag on inject_from_match,
measured on a new report_sealed.json, with frozen 3/47/0 byte-identical until a
reviewed Phase-5 promotion. wrong=0 gated on both paths.
Live-loop instrumentation found a schema-vs-extraction split: rate_with_currency
and temporal_aggregation matchers already extract full anchors (blocked on the
CandidateRate union / apply_rate primitive), while discrete_count/currency/
multiplicative are blocked on matcher extraction. And no refused case is one
injector away - every case is multi-statement, so the unit of measurable
progress is a target case's complete injector+composition set. Sequencing:
seal mechanism first, CandidateRate schema next, then a first complete
target-case unlock.
* feat(adr-0186): sealed candidate-graph injector lane mechanism (default-off)
Adds the seal mechanism for developing ADR-0170 W2-W5 injectors without
mutating the frozen serving metric:
- inject_from_match(match, sentence, *, sealed=False): when sealed=True,
consults the new _SEALED_INJECTORS table first; default-off never touches it.
- _SEALED_INJECTORS: empty at land (this PR ships the mechanism; the first
sealed capability is the CandidateRate schema, ADR-0186 §5.3).
- parse_and_solve(text, *, sealed=False): threads the flag to the per-statement
injection site. The seal is injector eligibility, not a forked reader.
wrong=0 guarantees (tests/test_adr_0186_sealed_injector_lane.py, failing-
under-violation): empty seal is a strict no-op; a registered sealed injector
admits ONLY under sealed=True and is invisible to the frozen path; train_sample
report stays 3/47/0. Verified: coverage probe 3/47/0 byte-identical, smoke +
architectural invariants green, 288 candidate-graph/recognizer tests pass (2
pre-existing failures unrelated, confirmed on unmodified main).
* docs(adr-0185): mark superseded by ADR-0186 (premise refuted by topology audit)
The topology audit proved ADR-0185's premise ('the engine cannot divide') is
true only of the derivation reader, which is disjoint from the candidate-graph
reader that owns the official 3/47/0 metric. The goal organ already divides;
its wall is injection coverage. ADR-0185 is retained as a record, not
implemented; cross-referenced from ADR-0186 §header.
* docs(adr-0184): scope the distinct-unit product rule — cut the product-of-all over-commit
The 47-refusal coverage diagnostic surfaced that the headline 3/47/0 (serving
recognizer) hides the sealed comprehension reader's real state: resolve_pooled over
the 50 real train_sample cases is 2 correct / 13 WRONG / 35 refused. The confuser
probe's wrong=0 was a misleading proxy — all 13 real wrongs are the whole-text
product-of-all, the unique complete candidate, committed unopposed.
Scopes the first lever, decided by MEASURING candidate refusal rules against the real
metric (correct up, wrong down on train_sample):
baseline 2 / 13 / 35
distinct-unit product (chosen) 2 / 8 / 40 <- cuts 5, zero coverage loss
product spans >1 clause 1 / 4 / 45 <- destroys correct 0003
drop all products 0 / 2 / 48
The distinct-unit rule: multiply/divide may compose DISTINCT units but a multiply
step whose operand repeats a non-empty unit already in the product (apples x apples,
cards x cards) is unit-incoherence -> refuse (unit^2 is never the answer). Empty-unit
operands exempt (0003 multiplies a blank-unit 0.75). Dimensional, not lexical
(ADR-0165-safe); refines verify.py clause 3 shared by self_verifies + classify.
Honest scope: 13->8, NOT 0. The remaining 8 are distinct-unit products in the wrong
shape (rate problems) = cue precision (ADR-0177 CP-2b), the next lever, NOT to be
faked with a per-case rule. Establishes the real scoreboard (resolve_pooled over
train_sample) and notes the ratification bridge (ADR-0175 Phase 5) as the separate
dependency for any of this to reach the serving headline.
Spec only; serving 3/47/0 untouched (verify is not on the serving path).
* feat(adr-0184): distinct-unit product rule — sealed reader real-GSM8K wrong 13->8
Cuts the over-eager product-of-all on real GSM8K. The sealed comprehension reader
(resolve_pooled over train_sample) was 2 correct / 13 WRONG / 35 refused; all 13 are
the whole-text product-of-all committed unopposed (0042->2.4M, 0048->19200,
0001->14400). This is the first lever measured against the REAL metric (resolve_pooled
over train_sample), not the curated confuser count.
Mechanism (verify._is_repeated_unit_product + classify_derivation downgrade):
a pure multiplicative chain whose operands repeat a non-empty unit forms unit^2
(apples x apples, cards x cards) -- never the answer; it is the product-of-all
multiplying independent groups. Such a product is classified `exempt`
(commit-INELIGIBLE), NOT removed. Empty units exempt (0003 multiplies blank-unit
0.75); divide exempt (feet/feet = legitimate count). Dimensional, not lexical
(ADR-0165-safe).
Implementation finding (folded into ADR §3.1): the naive version put the predicate
in the shared _base_reasons gate, which DROPPED the product and regressed the
confuser probe 1->3 -- the disguised-polarity 0001/0003 refuse only because the
coins x coins product DISAGREES with the coins + coins accumulation reading; dropping
it unmasked the additive reading as a unique wrong commit (80/30). The fix is the
downgrade: keep it as a commit-ineligible `exempt` candidate so it still forces the
disagreement. Pinned by test_downgrade_not_removal_preserves_disagreement_refusal.
Evidence (sealed lane; chat/ does not import verify -> serving frozen):
- resolve_pooled over train_sample: 2 correct / 8 wrong / 40 refused (was 2/13/35);
the 5 repeated-unit products (0001/0017/0042/0045/0048) now refuse, 0003/0021 kept.
- confuser probe: wrong unchanged (no 0001/0003 regression), positives still solve.
- serving train_sample 3/47/0 and practice (accumulation + search) 3/47/0
byte-identical; self_verifies/_base_reasons unchanged so search lanes are untouched.
- 171 derivation/pool/verify tests + 40 architectural invariants green.
Honest scope: 13->8, NOT 0. The remaining 8 (0011/0016/0018/0019/0025/0028/0032/0047)
are distinct-unit products in the wrong shape (rate problems) = cue precision
(ADR-0177 CP-2b), the next lever -- not to be faked with a per-case rule. Carries the
corrected ADR-0184 (supersedes the spec-only #484).
The lookback review of the four-PR stack (EX-6/pooling/prior-state/anchor-skip)
found the ADR-0182 spec under-predicted and under-scoped 0016. Records actuals
without editing the original spec (retained for provenance):
- Status -> Accepted/Implemented (PRs #476, #480, #481).
- §8 Realized results: confuser wrong spec-predicted 5->4->3, ACTUAL 5->2->1->0.
Pooling also caught disguised-polarity (bonus); 0016 needed anchor-skip PLUS
intra-clause accumulation (a conjunction split the spec framed as anchor-skip
alone) and yielded the bonus 0017 *solve*; the prior-state guard (#480) is a
distinct question-time lever sharing resolve_pooled.
- Folds in the lookback findings: solid items, the closed test-coverage gap
(anchor-skip refuse branches, #481 4205605), no live wrong=0 hazard (multi-actor
product-commit predates anchor-skip), and the open 0010 multi-referent spurious
(a graduation question, not a wrong).
Serving 3/47/0 byte-identical throughout. Doc only.
Regenerated the docs/decisions/README.md ## Index table from each ADR's own
title + Status line, naturally sorted by ADR id (handles 0114a, 0119.1,
0131.G.3.1, 0136.S2, etc.). The index had drifted to 51 of 229 ADRs; it now
lists every ADR through 0183. Only the Index table was replaced; the Current
frontier / chain notes / reasoning-capable-domains / session-log narrative is
untouched (it remains a curated, historically-scoped account, not the index).
Records the fork for getting words from audio WITHOUT a serving-time learned
model: (A) words-as-text, or (B) deterministic formant/phonetic decode + taught
vocabulary. Status: Proposed (stub) — deferred, not a committed design. Captures
the problem, the 0-param/decode-not-borrow/refuse-over-fabricate/reviewed-growth
constraints, and the open questions a full ADR must answer. Exists so the
serving path doesn't silently reach for Whisper. Cross-linked from
docs/audio_pipeline_overview.md §9.
Adds §9 subsection: a teacher is bootstrap scaffolding for the teaching phase,
not a production component (not ML distillation — CORE has no weights). Serving
path must never call a teacher. Production is Whisper-free conditioned on a
lawful runtime path: (A) words-as-text, or (B) matured deterministic
audio→lexeme decode. Flags the trap: teaching with a model does not auto-transfer
word-recognition into a 0-param engine. 'The teacher teaches; the lawful path
serves.'
Living ledger of architecture/model/dependency footprint. Headline: CORE is a
0-parameter, 0-weight architecture (substrate is algebra, not weights), enforced
by the teacher versor-invariance test. Tracks: learned params (0), optional
teacher lanes (4 declared, all inert, no model size chosen), 10 Python runtime
deps (datasets dominates), 8 Rust crates, 0 weight files. Includes a Whisper
size reference for when/if a lane is wired, and an update-on-PR + changelog
discipline. Lives at docs/model_dependency_size_tally.md.
A from-the-ground-up reference for the audio modality: waveform → canonicalize
→ frames → acoustic lexer → typed AudioIR → operators/rotors → (32,) versor,
with every spec/constant grounded in the code (PR-2..PR-6 stack).
Includes the three-way clarification of learned models: embeddings (never),
audio specs (CORE's own DSP, not any model), text transcript (Whisper/NeMo as
typed labels only). Documents the substrate-vs-evidence split, the verbatim
teacher policy, current inert/gated status, and the 'scrutinise the consumer'
flag. Cross-links ADR-0180/0181 + spec + eval-plan. Lives at
docs/audio_pipeline_overview.md.
A confuser's `expected: refuse` does not mean unanswerable. Every confuser carries
its true gold (`answer_numeric`) and is a solvable coverage target; `refuse` means
"the reader can't yet comprehend this category, so refusing is the honest outcome —
committing a WRONG value is the defect." Example: 0001 "buys a toy for 30 coins …
how many left?" is plain 50-30=20; it is refuse only because today's reader takes
`buys` as a gain.
Adds §2.1 (graduation protocol): when a general mechanism reads a category correctly
(validated on train_sample + the category, wrong=0 preserved), those cases graduate
refuse -> solve and committing their gold becomes a win. Reframes the `spurious`
verdict as "solved-before-graduation" (a graduation signal, with pair-consistency as
the genuine-reading-vs-surface-match discriminator), not automatically a defect.
Notes that no v1 category is degenerate, and how a truly-unanswerable case would be
labelled (answer_numeric: null + degenerate: true) so the two senses of "refuse"
stay distinguishable.
Spec only; no corpus/runner change (today's commits are wrong-reading, so spurious
stays flagged until a category genuinely graduates).
The confuser probe's two distractor-quantity wrongs (0014 ->300, 0016 ->3840)
have no clean tight fix: the `for` cue licenses both the 0014 distractor product
and the correct train-0021 product, and a target+foreign-unit refusal rule breaks
the canonical train-0003 boxes x erasers product. Telling a real multiplier from a
distractor by cue is the cue-precision problem ADR-0177 measured as not-yet-solvable
-- a tight rule here would be a reactive surface patch (the overfitting trap).
This ADR scopes the general, non-reactive alternative: let the wrong=0 DISAGREEMENT
rule do the refusing. Pool self-verifying candidates across composers so a blunt
product reading and a competing additive reading of the same problem disagree ->
refuse; legitimate products (0021/0003) have no competing reading, so they still
commit -- the structural property that distinguishes them, expressed without a cue.
Scoping surfaced two things a one-line plan would have missed:
- Completeness FORCES the distractor into every reading, so naive pooling changes
nothing. The mechanism needs a narrow, commit-INELIGIBLE completeness exemption
for isolated-foreign quantities -- it can only buy a refusal, never an answer, so
the commit-path completeness guarantee (ADR-0175's 9->2 multi-step fix) is intact.
- MS-1 Target exposes the union of body unit-shapes, NOT the question's asked-for
unit (verified). The exemption is therefore keyed to a reading's used-operand
units, not an asked unit that does not exist.
- 0016's distractor sits in the anchor-position clause, so it needs distractor-aware
anchor selection too: 0014 is the guaranteed win (wrong 5->4); 0016 lands (->3)
only when anchor-skip is built. Doc declines to claim both before that is proven.
Spec only, no code. Sealed lane; serving 3/47/0 untouched.
§1.5.3: content-addressed re-sort obligation is vacuous at compute_trace_hash
(folds vault_hits count, not contents); amend to apply at recall() result set
+ any future contents-bearing hash.
§2.2: Merge Kernel must content-address equal-score recall ties (multivector +
provenance bytes), not arrival/deque-index order — the general-path analog of
ADR-0181 §2.2's audio merge key.
Both sharpen the substrate ahead of the vault.rs LocalArena/SemilatticeDelta
refactor; neither blocks it. Sourced: docs/audit/ADR-0180-t1-t4-findings.md.
Flip ADR-0173 Proposed -> Accepted. This is the W0 gate for the
workbench-UI ratification wave: it amends ADR-0160's read-only stance
narrowly to admit operator-driven invocation of the three existing,
replay-gated Tier 1.5 handlers (apply_lexical_claim, apply_frame_claim,
apply_composition_claim) as a local keyboard accelerator over ADR-0161
Surface C. No UI code; implementation remains gated to the W1..W4
acceptance gates in the ADR.
Also lands the reconciled W3 ratification-corridor brief. It supersedes
the stale W3 section of WORKBENCH-UI-WAVE-BRIEF-PACK.md, which assumed a
'frontend zero' state (W1/W2 already merged via #295/#299/#329/#327/
#328/#303) and prescribed a Zustand store this repo never adopted. The
reconciled brief names the load-bearing facts the old one glossed:
- /ratify is advisory-only today (routes, never applies); W3's core
backend task is the advisory->in-process flip.
- live proposals carry shape_category='uncategorized', so the safe
category/polarity must be operator-supplied and allowlist-gated, not
hard-coded -- the exact silent-wrong-category path case 0050 guards.
Verification this session: read-only workbench v1 confirmed working
(API serves real deterministic data, honest 404s, traversal rejected,
ratify advisory/no-mutation; 31 python + 104 UI tests green; pnpm build
green).
No runtime/algebra/eval paths touched. Docs only.
Follow-on to ADR-0163 §F that corrects the metric exposed by the overfitting
finding (96/150 synthetic flips vs 1/50 real; the 0002 cable/fraction problem read
as accumulation -> 996). Specs a small, hand-curated, real-sourced set of hard
negatives + near-miss confusers (disguised-polarity verbs, pseudo-accumulation
fractions, multi-referent/multi-actor, distractor quantities, temporal/question-
scope, comparative-referent, unit confusers) with minimal-pair construction.
Scored the opposite way from a coverage lane: success = wrong=0 on confusers +
pair-consistency + honest refusal frontier, NEVER solved-count. Held-out by
contract (not a training-to-fit target); the CP ledger consumes the wrong attempts
as the hard negatives the templated corpus lacked. Guardrails forbid reactive vocab
growth and template expansion.
Grounded scope for GB-3b, the next Gap B move. Measured opportunity: 46/150
additive practice cases are sum-of-all==gold, all currently refusing, all the
single-referent accumulation shape ('X has N. He buys M more.' -> N+M). They
refuse correctly (GB-3a's multi-clause guard / the Alice+Bob hazard); the safe
ones differ by referent identity + a change-verb cue, which GB-3b reads.
Scope covers: the reading (anchor + change steps), the wrong=0-critical referent
model (minimal no-new-actor guard; cross-references ADR-0164.2/.3 + ADR-0174's
multi-actor hazard; deliberately does NOT resurrect the retired gender-blind
resolver), the proof-carrying wrong=0 obligations, the cue-precision coupling
(change cues should finally be reliable, closing CP-2a), the increments, and
honest flip expectations (big chunk in practice-additive; modest train_sample;
serving stays 3/47/0 until ratification).
ADR-0180 §1.5.4 + CLAUDE.md work-sequencing item 5 require these four
properties green on main before any core-rs/src/vault.rs change. They are
also the foundation ADR-0181 PR-5 (audio Delta-CRDT wiring) rides on.
T-1 set-equality of vault writes under shuffled ingest (+ idempotent
re-ingest at the content-addressed layer)
T-2 trace-hash invariance to vault order, + recall result-set invariance
to insertion order (the genuinely-failable half)
T-3 versor_apply non-commutativity (negative guard)
T-4 ProjectionHead.project purity across calls and threads
Findings (docs/audit/ADR-0180-t1-t4-findings.md):
- compute_trace_hash folds only vault_hits (a count), NOT vault contents, so
ADR-0180 §1.5.3's "re-sort vault state in content-addressed order" is
currently vacuous at the trace-hash layer; the live order-invariance
obligation is at recall() (result-set + count). Recommend amending §1.5.3.
- equal-score recall ties are index-sensitive; the Merge Kernel needs a
content-addressed tiebreak (mirrors ADR-0181 §2.2 merge key). Recommend
amending §2.2.
- append is genuinely semilattice-eligible; versor_apply is non-commutative.
7 passed; smoke suite green. No runtime/core mutation — tests + audit only.
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.
Maps the AssetOverflow audio-compiler proposal onto the existing
sensorium ProjectionHead boundary (ADR-0013) and the Delta-CRDT
sharded substrate (ADR-0180).
Core mapping decision: the audio chunk boundary IS the CRDT delta
boundary. In-chunk rotor composition (compile_events) is the explicit
serialization barrier ADR-0180 §1.5.2 requires for non-commutative
versor_apply; the resulting AudioCompilationUnit is the order-invariant
delta written at the only semilattice-eligible layer (vault/store).
The compiler's checksum chain supplies the content-addressed merge key
(canonical, ir, projection sha256) that ADR-0180 §1.5.3 demands, making
idempotence structural and the sequential==concurrent trace-hash proof
checkable.
Adds:
- docs/decisions/ADR-0181-audio-compiler-delta-crdt.md (decision + mapping)
- docs/plans/audio-compiler-spec.md (typed AudioIR, operator table,
manifest, numeric determinism, delta interface)
- docs/plans/audio-compiler-eval-plan.md (corpus, gates, A-1..A-6 CRDT
proof obligations, teacher-migration policy)
Docs only; no runtime/core mutation. PR-2..PR-6 substrate work sequenced
in the ADR, with PR-5 gated on ADR-0180 §1.5.4 (T-1..T-4) green on main.
* docs(handoff): parallel-work plan post-GB-3a (CP-1 / scale / EX-3 tracks)
Three disjoint-file tracks dispatchable in parallel with Claude's serial Gap-B
line; records the hard constraint that GB-3b/4/5 are serial on compose.py.
* docs(adr-0180): propose CRDT-sharded vault concurrency substrate
Drafts ADR-0180 (Proposed) for a Delta-CRDT sharded substrate to support
forthcoming multimodal ingestion (vision, kinematics) without serializing
on a global Vault lock.
§1.5 grounds the proof obligation against the existing single-threaded
Python ingest path (sensorium → ingest/gate → field → vault/store →
compute_trace_hash) and enumerates four pre-refactor test obligations
(T-1..T-4) that must be green on main before any change to
core-rs/src/vault.rs lands, per CLAUDE.md work-sequencing item 5.
§1.5.5 explicitly fences out: approximate recall (exact CGA recall is
non-negotiable), hidden background execution (Merge Kernel must be
explicitly mounted with telemetry), and MLX/UMA hardware optimization
(deferred to a follow-up ADR; CPU-only Rust path lands first).
Proposed only — no code changes to core-rs, sensorium, or field.
The mandated lookback review before GB-3 (CLAUDE.md §Lookback Review Discipline)
confirmed the audit's hazards H1/H2/H3 were LIVE: compose_sequential summed
same-unit quantities from the whole problem, merging unrelated referents/scopes
and admitting wrong structures whose value happened to ground:
H1 (second actor's apples) -> 6+4+2 = 12
H2 (comparative on other actor) -> (6+4)*2 = 20
H3 (later depletion event) -> 6+4+3 = 13
Root cause is the audit's G1/D2 drift: GB-2a re-extracts from the whole text and
ignores GB-1's clause structure. The fix is the GB-3 increment — make the composer
clause-scoped (consume segment_clauses), refusing when the licensed structure spans
clauses, because this slice cannot model referents:
- quantities must live in exactly ONE clause (0 or >1 -> refuse);
- a comparative outside that clause -> refuse (unmodelled referent binding).
All three hazards now refuse; all 7 GB-2 single-clause structures preserved
(list-sum, three-item, sum-then-scale, and the mixed-unit/disagreement/too-few
refusals). tests/test_adr_0178_gb3_referent_guard.py would fail against the
pre-guard code (12/20/13), so the obligation is proven, not decorative.
Scope/safety:
- compose_sequential is sealed substrate, not wired to a scorer -> serving
byte-identical 3/47/0 (lane-SHA 8/8, generate_claims --check OK); practice
unchanged 4/1/45. No new test failures (2 pre-existing on main).
- ADR-0178 amended: GB-2 relabelled GB-2a (list slice, drift G1 recorded);
GB-3 split into GB-3a (this referent guard, landed) and GB-3b (constructive
cross-clause chaining, next).
#449 shipped an inert, duplicated, unvalidated pack off-brief; closed it but kept
the on-thesis idea (ground the nouns GSM8K problems use) with the real scope it
would need to be beneficial.
Reconciles ChatGPT's four independently-branched extraction PRs (#451/#452/
#453/#454) into one coherent generate/derivation/extract.py. They each rewrote
the same file + same new test off main, so they conflicted pairwise and needed
integration, not a merge.
Integrated (span-tracked, most-specific-pass-first so numbers are never double
counted):
- EX-1 word-numbers (#452): reuses WORD_NUMBERS; tens-one hyphen compounds;
factor-bearing half/third/quarter excluded.
- EX-4 list-unit inheritance (#451): bare numeric list with one trailing unit.
- EX-5 sentence-final numbers (#454): bare final number with empty unit.
Deferred: EX-3 multi-word units (#453). Its greedy lowercase span reads
"6 apples and 4 apples" as unit "apples and", regressing GB-2's
test_same_unit_list_sums, and still can't recover real multi-word units from
0024-class text ("jumping jacks on"). Needs a tighter rule; see
docs/handoff/AUDIT-ADR-0179-EX-RECONCILE.md.
Verification (sealed lane only; chat/ does not import this module):
- Serving frozen: lane-SHA 8/8 match, generate_claims --check OK -> 3/47/0
byte-identical, wrong=0 held.
- Sealed practice improved 4/2/44 -> 4/1/45: case 0025 flips wrong->refused.
EX-1 reads "three", so completeness sees a quantity the 6x50 chain omits and
refuses the spurious 300 (gold 1200) instead of committing it.
- No new test failures (3 pre-existing on main).
Also fixes stale test drift from EX-2 (#447): TestDecimalGroundingGapIsDeferred
asserted decimals still refuse, but #447 made $0.75-class resolve to 864.
Renamed to TestDecimalGroundingResolves and updated to assert the flip.
Honest scope note: EX-4 does NOT unblock real case 0024 (its PR test used a
fabricated bare-list paraphrase). TestRealCase0024StillBlocked pins the true
boundary.
The actual coverage lever (ADR-0177 established cue-precision is its gate+prune,
not the unlock). Gap B = which quantities group via which ops in what order.
The reframe that resolves the rich-search-vs-uniqueness tension: structure-from-
READING, not enumeration. The text encodes its own structure — every gold case
fits a sequential clause-by-clause read (0021 one clause 15x10x3; 0003 48 ->x24
->x0.75; 0024 sum ->x3; 0033 seq chain + branch). So Gap B is comprehension: read
the problem, build the derivation structure as you read, hold alternatives on
ambiguity, reevaluate on lookback. This IS the project's original 'word-to-word
with lookback + problem-solving throughout' articulation, and the synthesis of
reader (0174) + solver/gate (0176) + learning (0177) + packs.
Decision: a comprehension-guided sequential composer — clause-local bounded
sub-derivations combined across clauses via relational cues (per/each/of->multiply,
and-list->sum, comparative->scale, more/older->add, fewer/less->subtract), held-
hypothesis on ambiguity + eliminate/reevaluate (REPOINT ADR-0174's inert reader
substrate from parse to STRUCTURE — where it finally becomes load-bearing), scored
by the 0176 self-verification gate + uniqueness, guided by 0177 cue-precision.
Locality bounds the search; relational cues constrain the cross-clause op so
uniqueness can RESOLVE (not just refuse). Coverage rises only as far as the reading
constrains structure; irreducible ambiguity refuses (wrong=0).
wrong=0 obligations: per-step self-verification, irreducible-ambiguity-refuses,
completeness+uniqueness over the whole structure, no-spurious-structure, determinism,
sealed. Honest hard parts: relational-cue precision (co-dependent with 0177 +
data-starved), clause segmentation, referent binding, branch/DAG (0033 quantity
reuse, GB-5), scale. This is the comprehension core — largest remaining capability;
serving lift materialises here, incrementally. Sub-phases GB-1..GB-6.
The lever MS-1->MS-3 proved: learn which (cue->op) readings are reliable from
practice eliminations, closing ADR-0175's self-verification 'necessary-not-
sufficient' gap before Phase 5.
Mechanism: per-(cue, op, unit_shape) reliability ledger (reuses ADR-0175 ClassTally
+ conservative_floor), fed by gold-labelling search candidate chains. Three uses:
U1 self-verification TRUST (near-term value: makes the Phase 5 proposal gate honest;
cold ledger => refuse, no junk proposals), U2 search guidance, U3 disagreement
resolution (coverage lever, hard-gated: margin+theta, ties refuse).
Load-bearing honesty (the bottleneck): a pattern earns POSITIVE signal only from a
gold-MATCHING chain; current blunt shapes match gold for ~4/50 cases, so the ledger
is starved (all-blame) AND structure failures (Gap B) pollute cue->op credit (a
correct op penalised for a product-of-ALL structure error). Plus data starvation
(50 cases << N_min). So cue-precision is COUPLED to richer guided shapes (Gap B) +
scale; it co-evolves (Gap B supplies gold-matching candidates -> cue-precision earns
signal -> prunes Gap B's search). It is the TRUST substrate + pruning engine, NOT
the coverage unlock by itself.
Recommended sequencing: CP-1/CP-2 (mechanism + self-verification trust, near-term
correctness value) now; richer guided shapes (Gap B) next as the flip lever; scale
makes it compound. wrong=0 obligations: cold=>no regression, ties refuse, theta-gated
serving, credit-noise can't flip serving (floor+N_min+margin+ratification+gold-tether),
determinism. Sub-phases CP-1..CP-4.
The dominant remaining lever for serving lift (79% need mul, median 3 steps;
single-step search + completeness flips only 0021). Grounded in gold step
structures: derivations are CHAINS with intermediate results as operands;
quantities come from body AND question (0033's '25'); several need comparatives
(half/N-times).
Decision: bounded, deterministic, TARGET-GUIDED multi-step grounded derivation
search, gated by ADR-0175's strengthened self-verification (grounding ∧ cue ∧
unit ∧ completeness) + uniqueness + a new question-target match. Sealed practice.
Two new ideas beyond 0175: question-targeting (turn the question into a target =
search-pruning + stopping criterion) and multi-step chaining (intermediates as
derived operands). Sub-phases MS-1..MS-5, wrong=0-first (gate/target before broad
search). Invariant #2 extended to chains. Honest hard part: search explosion +
uniqueness refuses most -> target-pruning + cue-guidance + depth-bound are the
tractability levers; low coverage initially; comparatives pack is a prerequisite;
serving lift still waits on 0175 Phase 5 ratification. Reuses solver +
question extraction + round-trip primitives.
Solid: 4 invariants proven by failing-under-violation tests; 84 green; seal
verified. No live hazards (9 search wrongs are sealed eliminations).
Drift: (1) 3a gate is PARTIAL vs spec — round-trip + no-contradiction not wired;
3b's necessary-not-sufficient finding follows -> a self-verification-strengthening
phase must precede Phase 5. (2) class taxonomy: Phase 2 uses gold operation-class
not capability-axis. (3) minor defensive-branch test gaps (no risk).
Lookback/cross-reference audit before any code. No hard blockers. Corrects 3
overclaims of reuse and records the audit:
- reliability ledger is NEW (calibration/ is a grid-search param tuner, not a ledger)
- 0174 eliminate/reevaluate/contemplate is reading-coupled -> 'repoint to solving'
needs generalization, not drop-in reuse
- teaching corridor evidence (MathReaderRefusalEvidence) is reader-refusal-coupled
-> solver-practice proposals need a new evidence type
Constraints recorded: wrong=0 pinned on serving lane by ~25 tests + train_sample
runner -> practice MUST be a separate lane (phasing updated). Alignments noted:
ADR-0165 (lexemes-not-grammar) fulfilled by thin-front-end/thick-solver split;
INV-07 governance = no-self-authorization pre-wired; MAX_TOTAL_BRANCHES precedent
for bounded deterministic search; seal exists.
Resolves Open Question #1. conservative_floor(s,k) = one-sided Wilson lower
bound over COMMITTED trials (k=correct+wrong; refusals excluded so coverage
never penalizes reliability). Constants: z=2.576 (single global pessimism
knob), N_min=10. Range [0,1) — never returns exactly 1.0. float64 rounded
half-to-even to 1e-9 for cross-backend replay. z (estimator skepticism) and
per-class theta (action's required reliability, human-set) are independent
dials; engine touches neither. Worked cost-to-clear table + asymmetry example
included.
Proposed ADR + session derivation doc capturing the 2026-05-28 design
discussion that took GSM8K Phase 5b from 'build another matcher' to a
self-calibrating problem solver.
Session doc (docs/sessions/SESSION-2026-05-28-...): the full journey —
problem (per-shape matchers can't compound; 79% need mul, 0% single-step),
dead-ends (brute-force spurious matches; 0021 is the only single-sentence
case and it's idiosyncratic), and the four pivots that converged on the
solution.
ADR-0175 (Proposed): the decision —
- two regimes: serving (wrong=0, unchanged) vs sealed practice
(attempt-and-eliminate; wrong is the learning signal)
- proof-carrying seal: practice never writes serving; ratification only
- deterministic attempt/refuse gate: reliability(C) / theta_required >= 1
(NOT RL; regimes collapse the reward side so only reliability is quantified)
- per-class calibration ledger of replayable COUNTS + conservative lower
bound; human-set theta ceilings raised only on evidence
- checkability ladder (gold > convergent self-verification > consistency-only),
privilege proportional to reversibility; provenance + gold tether against
correlated self-delusion
- diagnostic refusal routes skill vs knowledge vs ambiguity; three
compounding stores (vault/packs/pruning); self-proving acquisition narrows
human input without bypassing the gate
- five proof-obligation invariants (wrong=0 on serving, no spurious banking,
determinism, no self-authorization, retractability)
Supersedes the matcher-oriented ADR-0174 5b sub-phases; repoints the
0174 eliminate/reevaluate/contemplate substrate from reading to solving.
Open question: shape of conservative_floor + N_min.
Grounded in a ground-truth measurement of the 47 train_sample refusals
against GSM8K's own <<a*b=c>> calculator annotations:
- 37/47 (79%) use multiplication; 43/47 use mul-or-div; 0/47 single-step
- multiplication is the foundational general capability (breadth = the
anti-overfitting signal), but necessary-not-sufficient: no case flips
from an operation matcher alone
Solver already supports {add,subtract,transfer,multiply,divide,apply_rate,
compare_additive,compare_multiplicative}; the gap is the reader->injector->
Operation front-end (matcher extracts 0 anchors on real sentences).
Sub-phase sequence (biggest-chunk-first, measure-the-flip-gated):
- 5b.1 single-sentence multiplicative aggregate (cleanest proof, ~2-4)
- 5b.2 shallow 2-3 step composition (25/47, the real chunk)
- 5b.3 deep multi-step 4-7 (22/47) under held-hypothesis elimination
Generality guard: flipped cases must hold under ADR-0114a perturbation/OOD.
Explicitly NOT widening discrete_count injector (overfitting + wrong=0 hazard).
The recognizer/candidate-graph path is the single canonical reader.
Retires the flag-gated incremental-reader dispatch that admitted 0/50 on
train_sample and only added a dead fall-through:
- remove _try_comprehension_reader, _try_reader_for_question, _tokenize_sentence
and both dispatch blocks from generate/math_candidate_graph.py
- delete generate/comprehension/lifecycle_runtime_adapter.py (402 LOC,
used only by the question-reader dispatch)
- drop the comprehension_reader_questions config flag and the parse_and_solve
/ _score_one_candidate_graph config threading
- remove the --use-reader runner plumbing + flag-ON/OFF delta report from
the train_sample runner; refresh report.json (drops stale use_reader field
and a stale refusal-reason; verdicts unchanged at 3/47/0)
- remove the now-dead use_reader field from teaching/coverage.py
CoverageReport + the core teaching coverage CLI flag
- delete tests/test_reader_coexistence.py (flag-ON/OFF premise dissolved);
fix 3 ADR-0174 build_report calls and 2 subprocess invocations
lifecycle.py and audit.py are KEPT — they are load-bearing for the ADR-0172
math-contemplation teaching corridor (audit_problem -> teaching/math_*),
which a pre-deletion trace surfaced. The parent ADR's plan to delete
lifecycle.py was wrong; only its GSM8K scoring dispatch was inert.
Net -1,038 LOC (code + tests). Behavior-preserving:
- train_sample 3/47/0, byte-identical verdicts to pre-5a baseline
- determinism holds; smoke/packs/runtime/cognition/teaching lanes green
- contemplation corridor + lifecycle/audit tests pass
Pre-existing (NOT introduced here; reproduce on base with changes stashed):
5 out-of-curated-lane stale committed-artifact / stale-assertion failures
(test_math_evidence_e2e, test_adr_0126_runner_wiring, G3/coverage_probe
report-match, test_refusal_taxonomy_lane rebuild).
Pre-implementation investigation (lookback discipline) found the original
Phase 5 text inverted against shipped code:
- math_parser.py already out of runtime + candidate-graph scoring path
- lifecycle.py admits 0/50 (inert parallel parser, not the reader to promote)
- correct>=25 is a semantic gate structural collapse cannot meet
Decision (Invert + split): recognizer/candidate-graph path is the canonical
reader; lifecycle.py is retired. Phase 5a = structural retirement (net -LOC,
3/47/0 byte-identical, wrong=0). Phase 5b = semantic narrowness removal (the
real lift, own sub-phases, per-layer wrong=0 obligations).
All findings from the 2026-05-28 Phase 1-3a lookback review addressed
in one commit on the Phase 3a branch:
Wrong=0 hazard defense (the load-bearing fix):
- generate/math_candidate_graph.py: Phase 3a wiring now collects the
set of distinct proper-noun subjects seen in prior context. When
more than one exists, refuses with no_antecedent_ambiguous trace
event rather than guessing the most-recent (which was gender-blind
single-binding — wrong attribution in multi-actor problems).
- Refusals from the statement loop now preserve _statement_trace via
reader_trace in CandidateGraphResult (pre-existing latent issue:
Phase 2/3 trace events were dropped on early statement refusal).
- New tests assert: ambiguous case refuses with correct trace; single-
actor case still resolves normally.
Test coverage backfills (closes the 13 untested predicate-name gaps):
- TestCheckConstraintsInitialPredicateNames — 3 tests asserting the
exact predicate name on initial.value_grounds / initial.unit_grounds
/ initial.entity_grounds failure paths.
- TestCheckConstraintsOperationPredicateNames — 3 tests asserting
operation.verb_grounds / operation.value_grounds / operation.unit_grounds
failure-predicate-name parity.
- TestCheckConstraintsComposedInitialPath — 4 tests for the RAT-1
composed_initial path which was entirely untested in Phase 2
(parity manually verified during lookback review; now automated).
ADR amendment (honest doc vs impl drift):
- docs/decisions/ADR-0174-held-hypothesis-comprehension.md: appended
'Implementation Notes' section documenting:
- reevaluate signature differs from spec text (shipped is more
composable; treat as amended)
- Phase 2 wires per-candidate, not per-token (per-token is Phase 5)
- Lookback recompute is candidate-level, not token-level
- Hypothesis.constraint_state is never populated by Phase 2
- Multi-actor pronoun hazard defense rationale
- Honest LOC accounting: Phases 1-3a net +1,500 lines (Phase 5
delivers the projected net removal)
- Test coverage backfill summary
Cosmetic:
- lookback.py:297 unreachable raise — added # type: ignore[unreachable]
with comment explaining defensive future-proofing for Phase 3b.
Acceptance verified:
- 124/124 Phase 1+2+3a + reader tests pass (was 95/95 before backfills)
- Smoke 67/67, packs 141/141
- train_sample 3/47/0 preserved (wrong=0 invariant held)
- Multi-actor hazard live-tested: parse_and_solve refuses the
Alice/Bob/She case with no_antecedent_ambiguous trace event
See CLAUDE.md §Lookback Review Discipline and memory
feedback-lookback-review-discipline for the doctrine that surfaced
all of these issues at the right time.
ADR-0174 Phase 3a — substrate for held-hypothesis lookback.
Score unchanged at 3/47/0 (this PR is correctly-engineered
infrastructure; eval impact gated on ADR-0163.x recognizer expansion
documented in the follow-up brief).
Adds generate/comprehension/lookback.py:
- VALID_REFINEMENT_KINDS, VALID_UNRESOLVED_SLOTS — closed sets
contracted with reader_trace consumer
- PronounResolution refinement dataclass (pronoun + resolved_to +
evidence_source, all validated)
- Refinement Union (Phase 3b will widen with CompoundClauseExpansion)
- ReevaluateResult dataclass with admit/eliminate consistency
- reevaluate(hypothesis, refinement) operator — applies refinement,
re-runs check_constraints, returns refined Hypothesis or None.
- _rebuild_candidate_with_resolved_actor — rebuilds
CandidateOperation / CandidateInitial replacing the semantic actor
field (op.actor / initial.entity) while preserving matched_actor_token
/ matched_entity_token as the pronoun (so grounding still passes
against the held statement's source span).
Modifies generate/recognizer_match.py:
- _try_extract_discrete_count_anchor: pronoun-subject statements now
emit anchors with subject_role=<pronoun> + requires_pronoun_resolution
marker, rather than refusing at the _REFUSED_SUBJECT_TOKENS check.
The other narrowness layers (clause split, verb whitelist) still
refuse; only the pronoun layer changes.
Modifies generate/math_candidate_graph.py:
- After inject_from_match, when any parsed_anchor carries
requires_pronoun_resolution, the candidates are held as Hypothesis
objects with unresolved=('actor_pronoun',). The lookback path then
resolves via the existing _discourse_prior_subjects map and runs
PronounResolution refinements through reevaluate. Resolved
hypotheses flow into per_sentence_choices as if the regex parser
had produced them; unresolved hypotheses drop cleanly (refusal-
preferring). Emits 'lookback' JSON trace events with
outcome ∈ {admitted, eliminated, no_antecedent}.
Tests:
- tests/test_adr_0174_phase3_lookback.py — 17 acceptance tests
covering operator semantics on Operation/Initial, dataclass
invariants, closed-set constants, end-to-end wiring on synthetic
problems, and wrong=0 preservation on train_sample.
Phase 3.1 follow-up brief:
- docs/handoff/PHASE-3.1-FOLLOWUP-RECOGNIZER-EXPANSION.md documents
the empirical finding that the train_sample bottleneck is
verb-coverage (recognizer scope, ADR-0163.x) not lookback
(ADR-0174 scope). 11 verbs identified for HITL contemplation pass.
Recommends sequencing: Phase 3a now (substrate), ADR-0163.x verb
expansion next, Phase 3b after coverage matures.
Acceptance verified:
- 17/17 Phase 3a tests pass
- 95/95 existing tests pass (Phase 1 + Phase 2 + brief_11 + reader_phase2)
- Smoke 67/67, packs 141/141, lanes 8/8
- wrong=0 preserved, score unchanged 3/47/0 (intentional per brief)
Stacks on Phase 2 (PR #420). Rebases onto main after #416 + #420 land.
Phase 3b (compound-clause held hypotheses) is prerequisite for Phase
4 (in-loop contemplate) to have anything to operate on. Combined
scope rather than separate briefs because:
- Phase 3b alone: 0 lift on train_sample (multi-actor defense
refuses, solver gaps prevent admission)
- Phase 3b + Phase 4: 2-4 case lift via gendered-pronoun resolution
- Phase 3b + 4 + solver multi-qty (separate ADR): 6-8 case lift
First concrete Phase 4 use case: gendered pronoun resolution via a
new en_core_names_v1 pack. Turns the multi-actor defense from
refuse-on-ambiguity into admit-via-evidence when an unambiguous
gendered name exists for one antecedent.
Architecture overview, Phase 3b extractor design, Phase 4
contemplate adapters (vault > packs > audit_history), wrong=0
hazard surfaces, sequencing (3b then 4 stacked), truth tests, and
deliberately-excluded scope (solver work, verb expansion, per-token
apply_word integration — all separate ADRs).
HYPOTHESIS_CAP raise from 4 to 8 needed for Phase 3b (case 0040
has 5 anchors). Documented in scope.
References: ADR-0174 (held-hypothesis comprehension), CLAUDE.md
§Lookback Review Discipline, memories for multi-actor pronoun
hazard and case-0050.
Adds second mandatory hazard test to VE-A/B acceptance criteria:
multi-actor pronoun ambiguity must trigger no_antecedent_ambiguous
refusal per ADR-0174 Phase 3a defense.
Verb expansion widens the cases that reach Phase 3a lookback wiring;
without this test the multi-actor wrong=0 hazard could fire silently
in production. Surfaced by 2026-05-28 Phase 1-3a lookback review.
References: project-adr-0174-multi-actor-pronoun-hazard memory,
CLAUDE.md §Lookback Review Discipline.
Operationalises the recommendation from PHASE-3.1-FOLLOWUP-RECOGNIZER-EXPANSION.md
into three independent dispatchable PRs:
- VE-A: acquisition widening (gain, earn, save, accumulate, acquire) — Opus
- VE-B: new depletion class (donate, give, lose, spend, eat) — Opus
- VE-C: refusal evidence for non-arithmetic verbs (instrumentation only) — Sonnet
Each PR includes:
- Hazard pinning: explicit case 0050 test must pass after widening
- Lift evidence: at least one train_sample case moves refused → correct
- Phase 3a substrate fires: the lifted case shows a 'lookback' trace event
- wrong=0 preserved across train_sample AND case 0050
Operator decisions needed before dispatch: which specific lemmas to
admit per class, whether to introduce the depletion class at all, and
whether to ship VE-C as evidence groundwork.
Verb classification rationale per lemma documented in the brief.
Hazard surfaces called out per lemma (delta-of-attribute for 'gained',
direction inversion for 'lost', monetary-vs-time ambiguity for 'saved').
No timelines; operator dispatches when ready.
Extends ADR-0164's incremental comprehension reader from single-committed
state to held-hypothesis state, adding lookback re-evaluation and in-loop
contemplation. Diagnoses why the ADR-0164 reader is wired but inert
(all-or-nothing refusal at first unknown token / unexpected category).
Architecture: apply_word produces ProblemReadingState.open_hypotheses
(small ranked set, HYPOTHESIS_CAP=4 initial). Three operators per token:
EMIT (extend compatible hypotheses), ELIMINATE (constraint violations
remove hypotheses immediately), HOLD (uncommitted hypotheses survive at
lower confidence). At finalize(), |survivors|=0 refuses, |survivors|=1
admits, |survivors|>=2 invokes in-loop contemplate() over vault + packs
+ audit history. Ambiguity contemplation cannot resolve refuses cleanly,
preserving wrong=0.
Collapses three parallel parsing systems into one held-hypothesis
reader: removes regex parser runtime path (math_parser.py),
per-category injector dispatch table (recognizer_anchor_inject._INJECTORS),
and duplicate per-sentence-choices scaffolding. Net ~1,900 lines
removed; reader grows by ~600 for hypothesis state + reevaluate +
contemplate.
Preserves ADR-0164 lexicon and category set, ADR-0165 regex scope,
ADR-0150/0152/0155/0161 HITL corridor, binding graph + solver
substrate, capability-axis lanes, replay-equivalence gate. Trust
boundary for in-loop contemplation: read-only over vault/packs/audit;
ratification still rides offline HITL.
Status: Proposed. Six phases (no timelines) gated on wrong=0 and
capability-axis 100% at each transition. Five open questions resolved
before Phase 1 PR.
C1: delete generate/math_versor_arithmetic.py and its 3 tests (ADR-0139
add-only arithmetic spike; no runtime consumers, no pipeline wiring,
follow-on lift paused per module docstring).
C3: gitignore engine_state runtime artifacts (manifest.json,
recognizers.jsonl, discovery_candidates.jsonl). Module code
(engine_state/__init__.py) remains tracked; generated checkpoint
files should not be.
C5: document reader zero-delta root cause in train_sample/v1/README.md.
Both Phase 2 (whole-problem) and Phase 1 (question-only) reader paths are
called but inert because all 47 refusals are statement-level NO_INJECTOR
gaps, not question-sentence gaps. Reader unblocks when injector coverage
expands (C2 work). report.json use_reader flag corrected to reflect last run.
C6: add deprecation header to generate/math_parser.py pointing at
generate.math_candidate_graph.parse_and_solve as the live path.
C2/C4 briefs: docs/handoff/CLEANUP-C2-run-lane-migration.md and
docs/handoff/CLEANUP-C4-compositions-compile.md added as operator
dispatch docs for the medium-scope wiring tasks.
Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the ADR-0164 reader are correctly implemented but
contribute zero eval admissions today. The bottleneck is lexicon coverage
(unknown verbs/nouns) and explicit Phase 2.1 scope gates (fractions), not
the all-or-nothing dispatch policy.
Produces COMPREHENSION-READER-AUDIT.md answering the five Brief C questions:
call trace, cognition-lane usage (none), bottleneck analysis, ADR promise
audit, and three falsifiable options (operationalize/relabel/retire).
Recommendation: relabel (status update) now; lexicon expansion next as the
highest-leverage first step toward actual eval lift.
Also updates ADR-0164 status from "Proposed" to "Partially implemented" with
a Current Status table and next-lift-path summary.
After RAT-1's architecture audit exposed five systematically
underbuilt components, A (the 4 missing injectors) is being taken by
this agent. The other four are parallel-safe and each gets its own
dispatch brief:
B (Opus) — contemplation produces ratifiable claims (medium)
C (Sonnet) — comprehension reader audit + decision (small→medium)
D (Sonnet) — core teaching coverage CLI (small)
E (Codex) — lexical ratification auto-compile (tiny)
Each brief carries: operator profile, branch name, base, dispatch
line, reads required FIRST, outcome inventory, hard requirements,
tests, truth test. Anti-regression invariants enumerated. All
parallel-safe — no shared file conflicts.
The dispatch DAG names ALL FIVE pieces with A in-flight as a peer.
Final PR of the matcher-extension wave. Ships:
1. tests/test_me5_all_categories_integration.py — 4 new tests:
- test_all_three_canaries_admit_through_full_pipeline: stages a
pack with all three SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES entries +
ratifies, runs Maria/Sam/Tom canaries through matcher →
inject_from_match, asserts admission for all three
- test_partial_pack_only_admits_present_categories: refusal-
preferring when only one category is ratified
- test_all_safe_categories_have_extension_admission: pins that
SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES is exactly the three covered
categories (breaks if future ADR widens without matcher)
- test_falsifies_uniformly_suppresses_across_categories:
polarity discipline holds across all three matchers
2. docs/handoff/ME1-ME5-MILESTONE.md — wave milestone doc:
- architecture diagram (audit → ratify → compile → load →
match → consult → admit)
- SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES coverage matrix
- invariants preserved across the entire stack
- scope boundary (what does NOT fire yet — RAT-1 follow-up)
- recommended next dispatch
3. Test registration in core/cli.py packs suite.
Across the full ME-1..ME-5 stack:
- 5 stacked PRs (#400/#401/#402/#403/#404)
- 1 foundation PR (#398 — consumption wiring)
- 114 new tests, all green
- packs suite 127 passed
- core eval gsm8k_math --split public → 150/150, wrong=0
- All three SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES have matcher extensions
Anti-regression invariants preserved across the entire stack:
- wrong == 0 on public split
- Case 0050 hazard pin (parametrized over all three categories)
- ADR-0166 — no new eval lanes
- ADR-0167 partition — no cognition imports
- ADR-0169 mutation boundary — registry is a gate, not arithmetic
- All matcher detection paths byte-identical
- engine_state/* never committed
- SAFE_COMPOSITION_CATEGORIES enforced at write AND load
- polarity falsifies honored uniformly
Live train_sample admission requires operator-seeded ratifications
(RAT-1 follow-up). Wiring is end-to-end correct, verified by ME-5
integration tests.
Memory: milestone-me1-me5-matcher-extensions-complete saved.
Stacks on PR #403 (base: feat/matcher-extension-subtractive).
Two pre-public-release refreshes:
1. docs/position_paper.md §4 — refresh refusal taxonomy
The previous table listed an older taxonomy (fraction_operand /
compound_comparative / etc.) that does not match the current
candidate-graph eval output. Replaced with the actual taxonomy
emitted by the train_sample runner — refusals are categorized by
shape (recognized_but_uninjectable + per-ShapeCategory) which ties
directly to the architecture's recognizer/injector concepts.
Also refreshed §5 "Honest Gaps" to describe the active frontier in
terms of injector coverage (the registry-driven composition path)
rather than parser-level grammar extensions. The 47/50 refusal
count, 3/50 correct count, and wrong=0 invariant are unchanged.
2. COMMERCIAL_LICENSE.md — enumerate subsystems explicitly
The previous "vault memory / versor engine / epistemic teaching
loop / ingest / admissibility gate / holonomy encoder" listing
predated the math-domain composition wave. Expanded the list to
cover the full current architecture:
- versor engine + Cl(4,1) algebra
- vault + exact CGA recall
- ingest gate
- admissibility gate + Forward Semantic Control
- holonomy encoder
- epistemic teaching loop (ADR-0055..0057)
- contemplation loop + decomposer (ADR-0080, ADR-0172)
- math-domain ratification handlers (ADR-0167..0169)
- composition-pattern registry + registry-driven injector
- audit-as-teaching-evidence corridor
- identity + safety pack subsystems
- language-pack compiler + verified manifest checksums
- Logos articulation + three-language vocabulary manifold
- Rust algebra backend
- any derived or successor implementation
Explicit "enumerated subsystems are illustrative, not limiting"
clause covers any future module + ADR-ratified contract under the
same terms. New subsystems are covered automatically.
LICENSE (the non-commercial form) is unchanged — it already covers
"Software" broadly. CLAIMS.md is auto-generated and was verified
current (regeneration produces no diff).
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).
W0 of the workbench-UI wave per WORKBENCH-UI-WAVE-SCOPING.md.
Pure docs PR; no UI code.
Decision: the workbench is a local keyboard accelerator for the
existing local-CLI ratification surface (ADR-0161 Surface C), not a
fourth ratification surface and not a new trust boundary. Every
workbench-driven ratification action invokes the same Python
entrypoint as the corresponding CLI invocation, with identical
preconditions, exceptions, and append-only JSONL effects.
Amends ADR-0160 v1 read-only stance narrowly: admits driving the
three Tier 1.5 handlers (apply_lexical_claim, apply_frame_claim,
apply_composition_claim) and the existing core teaching review path
through the workbench API. Honors ADR-0161's surface set unchanged
(workbench is part of Surface C, not a new surface). Honors ADR-0162
no-go list and pins the keyboard contract referenced in §7.
Five open questions from the scoping brief resolved:
Q1 in-process via existing Python entrypoints
Q2 single-operator (multi-operator deferred)
Q3 same chat/telemetry.py JSONL sink, new event kinds
(operator_ratify / operator_reject / operator_defer /
operator_navigate); no parallel log
Q4 fonts and icons bundled locally; no CDN
Q5 dist/ gitignored; CI verifies build, does not commit artifact
Ratification record extended with ratifier_kind: "workbench" — audit
forensic discriminant only, not a permission gate. proposal_id + to
remain the only load-bearing replay fields (ADR-0161 §5 unchanged).
Compatibility audit covers ADR-0146, 0150, 0152, 0160, 0161, 0162,
0167, 0168/0168.1, 0169/0169.1, 0172. Forbidden surface enumerated:
no remote operator, no CORS relaxation, no new mutation paths, no
auto-ratify, no batch ratification, no engine_state writes outside
the existing checkpoint path, no parallel workbench-events log, no
mobile/responsive form factors (ratification stays on Surfaces A+B
for mobile per ADR-0161).
Acceptance gates pinned per W1..W4 of the scoping brief.
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.
* docs(ADR-0172): math-domain corpus-decomposition mechanism (Learning Arc analog)
Scoping ADR for the math-domain analog of cognition's
`teaching/contemplation.py` corpus-decomposition loop (Learning Arc
milestone 2026-05-25).
## What this ADR scopes
A mechanism that reads the math audit corpus and emits
`MathReaderRefusalShapeProposal` records — structural commonalities
across N refusal cases, paired with the candidate mechanism change
that would resolve them (matcher extension, injector sub-shape,
vocabulary addition, frame reclassification).
Today the operator does this decomposition by hand (reads
audit_brief_11.md, identifies the commonality across 21 DCS
refusals, scopes the matcher/injector extension, files a focused PR).
ADR-0172 shifts the decomposition to the engine, with HITL
ratification preserved.
## Sequencing — explicit
ADR-0172 ships AFTER ADR-0170 (injector contract widening),
ADR-0168 (FrameClaim handler), and ADR-0169 (CompositionClaim
handler — reserved). Without those substrates, the decomposer can
identify patterns but cannot route them to a ratification handler
that knows how to materialize them. Cognition's learning arc
followed this same sequencing: substrate first, then decomposer.
## Why this matters
ADR-0167 LexicalClaim shipped the math-domain wire from refusal →
evidence → operator-ratification. ADR-0172 closes the gap to the
engine-decomposes loop — the moment cognition's learning arc
qualitatively shifted from "engine refuses + operator authors" to
"engine teaches itself through reviewed correction."
The Learning Arc memory entry (2026-05-25) names that moment as
when measurable progress accelerated. ADR-0172 makes the math-domain
trajectory toward the same loop explicit in the queue.
## Hard invariants preserved
- wrong=0 by construction (proposals are evidence-only)
- ADR-0166: no new eval lanes
- No teaching-store / pack mutation
- No non-deterministic mechanism (rule-based grouping, not learned
classification)
- Cross-domain partition (ADR-0167 W2-C) preserves cognition
contemplation behavior
No code, no test, no eval, no pack change in this PR.
## Cross-references
- ADR-0056/0057 — cognition contemplation/proposal substrate (template)
- ADR-0167 + FOLLOWUPS §1 — parent evidence wire
- ADR-0168 + ADR-0168.1 — FrameClaim (ratification target)
- ADR-0169 (reserved) — CompositionClaim (ratification target)
- ADR-0170 — injector contract widening (substrate prerequisite)
- Memory: Learning Arc Milestone 2026-05-25 — the moment to recreate
- Thesis: decoding, not generating — the principle preserved
* amend(ADR-0172): add Tier 2 — intensional contemplation with test-and-learn loop
Per operator feedback during ADR-0172 review: the corpus-decomposition
mechanism should not only emit explicit rules (extensional) but also
develop inference (intensional) — recognizing structural equivalence
classes across surface variations without enumerating them.
## Tier 2 — intensional contemplation
Engine recognizes that 'Sam has 5 apples' and 'Sam collected 5 apples'
carry the same canonical proposition structure, without an explicit
verb-list extension. Emits MathReaderInferenceProposal records that
name structural equivalence classes rather than enumerable rules.
This is the thesis word the original draft missed: rationalization.
Tier 1 ratifies rules; Tier 2 ratifies inference.
## Test-and-learn loop
Tier 2 proposals carry held-out test evidence:
1. Decomposer surfaces hypothesis
2. Held-out subset of corpus reserved
3. Bridge applied to held-out cases; admissibility gates run
4. Outcome scored (positive / negative / neutral)
5. Negative-evidence proposals auto-rejected before HITL
6. Operator reviews proposal + test result, not bare claim
This makes Tier 2 thesis-coherent: engine decodes a structural
pattern, tests it against unseen corpus cases, surfaces the test
result. Wrong=0 cannot leak through — held-out test failures reject
internally.
## Updated implementation outline
Tier 1 wave: W1-W4 (schema, decomposer, CLI, workbench integration)
Tier 2 wave: W5-W9 (schema, equivalence-class recognizer, test-and-learn
loop, HITL integration, bridge application path)
## Hard invariants preserved at both tiers
- wrong=0 by construction (Tier 1: evidence-only proposals; Tier 2:
held-out test rejects wrong-admitting bridges internally)
- ADR-0166: no new eval lanes
- No non-deterministic mechanism (rule-based grouping + deterministic
test-and-learn, not learned classification)
- Cross-domain partition preserves cognition contemplation behavior
* amend(ADR-0172): split Tier 2 test-and-learn into two-arm confirmation
Per operator feedback during ADR-0172 review: 'confirm against known
facts/prior solutions' is the missing arm. The Tier 2 test-and-learn
loop now has BOTH:
- Arm 1 (negative / wrong=0 on held-out refusals) — already drafted
- Arm 2 (positive / known-good preservation) — NEW
Arm 2 inherits ADR-0057's replay-equivalence contract: any
inferential bridge that would change a currently-correct outcome is
REJECTED INTERNALLY before reaching HITL, even if the new outcome is
defensible. Existing truth survives; new truth is gated.
Both arms must PASS or be neutral. Either arm rejecting → proposal
does not reach the operator. This makes the engine's reasoning
provably conservative: it confirms against truth it already knows AND
truth it hasn't yet decided.
The 5-step proposal lifecycle is updated to reflect both arms +
test-set partition + per-case verdict tables in the emitted proposal.
No code change. No runtime effect.
* amend(ADR-0172): add foundational reasoning-articulation substrate
Per operator feedback: for the engine to infer/test/learn from
feedback, it must first be able to ARTICULATE its own reasoning in a
structured, persistent, replayable form.
Articulation is the project thesis's 5th anchor ("listen → comprehend
→ recall → think → articulate → learn from reviewed correction →
replay"). Today CORE articulates SURFACE (templated realizer output)
but does not articulate REASONING — the inference chain that took the
engine from refusal corpus to hypothesis to proposal.
Without reasoning-articulation, none of the three loops can work:
- Loop 1 (self-test) has nothing to record about what it tested or why
- Loop 2 (HITL review) sees a black-box conclusion, not inference chain
- Loop 3 (feedback) has no specific step the operator can target with
a rejection rationale
## Substrate: ReasoningTrace schema
Every proposal carries a typed, content-addressable
ReasoningTrace recording each inference step:
ReasoningStep:
step_kind: observation | grouping | abstraction | hypothesis |
test_design | test_application | test_result | conclusion
input_pointers: prior steps + evidence rows
claim: human-readable assertion at this step
justification: why the engine made the claim
output_payload: type-discriminated by step_kind
The trace is byte-identical across replays of the same corpus +
verdict history. Inherits CORE's existing determinism discipline.
## Sequencing
Articulation ships FIRST (new W0 wave) — it is the prerequisite for
Tier 1 and Tier 2 and Loop 3. Each downstream wave emits or consumes
ReasoningTraces.
## Hard invariants preserved
- Deterministic-replay (trace byte-identical under same inputs)
- ADR-0057 replay-equivalence (trace IDs stable across reruns)
- No non-determinism added (rule-based step emission, not learning)
- ADR-0166: no new eval lanes
No code, no test, no eval, no pack change in this PR.
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
Closes the Brief 11 sequence with a decision artifact (not a roadmap)
selecting the next capability after GSM8K Phase 2 reader closure.
Four candidates compared against ADR-0166's three-question test:
- A. Continued GSM8K operator closure
- B. Cross-domain reader generalization
- C. Tool-use trace integration
- D. Workbench demo hardening
Recommendation: continued GSM8K operator closure, starting with the
`lexicon_entry` row of the Brief 11B audit. The only candidate that
passes Q1/Q2/Q3 cleanly today and has an explicit Round-3 finish line.
Docs-only. No code, no test, no eval, no pack change.
Extend the comprehension reader from question-only scope to whole-
problem scope. Phase 1 (Brief 8 / #326) implemented question_frame;
this brief implements initial_state_frame, operation_frame, and
descriptive_frame, plus finalize() projection into a strict
ADR-0115 MathProblemGraph.
Architecturally correct under ADR-0164.3; not yet productive on
GSM8K train_sample. Below-floor measurement documented; specific
bottlenecks tabled for Phase 2.1 follow-up.
What landed
- Frame-opener dispatch in lifecycle.py for the three new statement
frames, plus rule handlers (_rule_op_*, _rule_preframe_*,
_rule_descriptive_*).
- finalize(state) -> MathProblemGraph | ReaderRefusal: pure
projection with closure checks (entity registry non-empty,
unknown target bound, every op/initial references a known entity,
Decimal precision projects losslessly).
- _classify extended to 3-tuple (category, surface, decimal_value)
with possessive strip retry. Brief 8.2's sentence-initial
lookup-first + gender-skip preserved AND extended to mid-sentence
(gender is enrichment everywhere, never admission).
- Whole-problem coexistence dispatch in math_candidate_graph.py
(config.comprehension_reader_questions=True): reader attempts the
whole problem; on any ReaderRefusal falls through to existing
regex parser. All-or-nothing per the brief.
- Lexicon expansion (carried into renamed proper_noun_gender_*
files): +2 accumulation_verb (adopt, invest), +2 currency_unit_noun
(dollar, cent), +6 capacity_verb (fill, lift, play, work, finish,
drive), +5 female names (allison, brooke, jan, marion, sidney),
+14 male names (bart, fernando, georgie, jake, jed, jeremie, jose,
orlando, rex, rudolph, steve, troy, xavier, yun), +numerous
count_unit_noun, drain_token, time_unit_noun.
- ADR-0164.4-phase2-statement-frame-reader.md — the architectural
rationale and acceptance contract.
Measurement (reader_phase2_delta.json):
flag-OFF: correct=3 refused=47 wrong=0
flag-ON: correct=3 refused=47 wrong=0
delta: 0/0/0
Below the brief's floor of correct >= 4. Architecture is sound — the
reader admits cases as graphs when the structure resolves, refuses
cleanly otherwise, preserves wrong=0 across both flag states.
Bottleneck table (from per-case attribution):
count refusal_class dominant cause
----- ---------------------- ------------------------------------
18 incomplete_operation multi-quantity ops; no-quantity op
11 unknown_word "hundred", "presently", "one-hour",
non-math verbs (compound numerics,
lexicon gaps)
6 unexpected_category fraction / percentage literals;
multi-subject sentences
6 unresolved_pronoun "them", "their", "his" with no
compatible entity
5 unattached_quantity quantity never bound to a unit
1 no_question_target question parsed but slot never set
Closing the gate to mixed-bounded [4, 24] is Phase 2.1 scope: extend
composition rules for multi-quantity ops, add fraction/percentage
primitives (per ADR-0164.1 amendment), expand lexicon for the
remaining unknown_word cases, extend pronoun resolution.
Invariants preserved
- wrong = 0 in both flag states ✓
- flag-OFF byte-identical to today ✓
- determinism (50/50 identical runs) ✓
- Capability axes G1-G5, S1 unchanged ✓
- Reader tests: 19 (Phase 2) + 18 (Phase 1, post-update) + 53 (pack)
+ 76 (lexicon + primitives) = 166 specific to this change; all pass
- core test --suite smoke -q: 67 passed
Rebase note
This PR was authored against an older base; rebased onto current
main to incorporate #333 (Brief 8.2 universal proper_noun_token
primitive) and #334 (ADR-0166 measurement discipline). The rebase
required:
- Lexicon files renamed proper_noun_entity_* -> proper_noun_gender_*
(with the Phase 2 additions merged into the gender_* files)
- Compiled lexicon.jsonl unchanged from #333's 207-entry state
(Phase 2's per-category additions are runtime-visible via the
source loader, not via the compiled file)
- _classify reconciled with Brief 8.2's sentence-initial dispatch +
Phase 2's 3-tuple decimal-value return
- All dispatch tables and category checks updated to reference
proper_noun_token (singular) instead of proper_noun_entity_{f,m}
- Three Phase 1 test expectations updated to reflect Phase 2
behavior (proper noun at position 0 now opens statement pre-frame
instead of refusing; pronoun resolution applies per ADR-0164.2)
Per ADR-0166's three-question test, this PR is honest measurement:
capability exists, at least one case admits, lane distinguishes
presence from absence — which the bottleneck table demonstrates.
Refs ADR-0164.3 §Phasing Phase 2, ADR-0164.1 amendment (Brief 8.2),
ADR-0166 §"Mixed (notable but not blocking)" — except here, below
floor.
Add the fourth governing principle to the family of structural-
invariant ADRs (alongside ADR-0114a anti-overfitting, ADR-0165 regex
scope rule, CLAUDE.md versor invariant). The rule, stated negatively:
do not author eval lanes ahead of the operators those lanes test, and
do not expand the eval surface ahead of the capability that produces
signal on it.
Three-question test for new eval lanes:
1. Does the capability this lane probes exist on main today?
2. Has at least one case admitted end-to-end through that capability?
3. Will running this lane distinguish capability-presence from
capability-absence?
A "no" on any defers the lane until the capability lands. Tier 3 TBD
rows are data debt; running existing lanes to populate them is
permitted (snapshot of current capability) but is NOT a substitute for
capability work.
Why now: a strategic-analysis exchange this session proposed authoring
spatial_geometry_ood, historical_sequence_ood, and other new lanes
while GSM8K-math sits at 3/47/0 and the comprehension reader (ADR-0164)
is mid-build. The proposal's "most impactful next commit is to run all
Tier 3 lanes" framing would have generated noise (lanes refusing
uniformly because their underlying operators don't exist) rather than
the diagnostic signal that justifies prioritization. ADR-0166 mechanizes
the constraint that prevents that pattern.
Session log SESSION-2026-05-27-tier3-sequencing.md captures the
narrative: what the analysis got right (geometry-first as strategic
bet, sequencing instincts), what it missed (GSM8K-math treated as
solved; comprehension reader pivot not in context), and the honest
re-sequence (Brief 10 first; Tier 3 snapshot in parallel; cross-domain
transfer after verifying whether the reader IS the requested
structural-pattern recognizer under a different name).
The session also surfaced a mid-flight diagnostic from PR #332: the
actual GSM8K bottleneck is the ADR-0163 recognizer injector emitting
incomplete graphs, which the reader correctly refuses to admit
(wrong=0 by construction via the new guard). Brief 10 (Phase 2 reader)
dominates here because it replaces the inadequate injector surface
entirely.
No code changes. ADRs only.
Refs ADR-0114a, ADR-0165, CLAUDE.md §"Non-Negotiable Field Invariant".
Proposed sub-ADR under ADR-0164 resolving Open question #3.
- Reviews existing _resolve_question_entity heuristic in
generate/math_candidate_parser.py: refuse-on-ambiguity is correct,
but flat-document whitelist scan misses recency, kinship entities,
group antecedents from conjunction, and names absent from the
closed name lists.
- Specifies EntityRegistry as a field on ProblemReadingState
(ADR-0164.3 companion): append-only entries with canonical name,
inferred gender + source, mention positions, and relational anchor
for kinship entities.
- Two refusal-first ambiguity rules: ambiguous_pronoun_referent (R1,
recency tiebreaker within RECENCY_GAP_MIN refuses) and
unresolved_pronoun (R2).
- Worked walk-through on five GSM8K train_sample cases (0001 Tina,
0010 Yun/Marion, 0027 Malcolm, 0017 Jason/Eric, 0033 Rachel + kin).
- Three policy-vs-heuristic disagreements (D1 Jason/Eric him; D2
Georgie he via single-salient back-fill; D3 Aaron/Carson they via
GROUP entry) all turn refusals into correct resolutions, plus one
counter-direction D4 where new policy is principled-conservative.
- Preserves wrong = 0 by construction at every branch.
Closes ADR-0164 §Open question #1. Enumerates the 8-primitive seed
registry for en_core_math_v1 (decimal-currency, currency, percentage,
fraction, time-amount, numeric, ordinal, mass-noun-token), fixes the
record schema (name/pattern/emits/extracted_fields/provenance/priority),
documents pairwise overlap precedence with rationale, and records 4
rejected temptations (rate phrases, compound entities, question stems,
compound numerics) so the ADR-0165 grammar/lexeme boundary doesn't get
relitigated by future authors.
Two-level state model for the incremental comprehension reader:
ProblemReadingState (outer, problem-scoped) carries the entity registry,
accumulated initial possessions, accumulated operations, the unknown
target slot, and the pronoun resolution history. SentenceReadingState
(inner, sentence-scoped) carries the current frame, expectation,
pending quantities, pending entity reference, pending verb, lookback
window, and the partial frame payload under construction.
Lifecycle API (signatures only): begin_sentence, apply_word,
end_sentence. All three pure / deterministic / no I/O. apply_word
reads from problem_state for pronoun resolution per ADR-0164.2 but
does not mutate it; only end_sentence produces a new
ProblemReadingState that folds in the just-closed sentence's
contribution.
Closed READER_REFUSAL_REASONS vocabulary across three lifetime
groupings (token-level, sentence-level, problem-level), mirroring
ADR-0134's admissibility-reason discipline.
Canonical-bytes serialization for both state levels matches existing
trace_hash and MathProblemGraph.canonical_bytes discipline.
Sorted-keys JSON, compact separators, Decimal-as-string for
precision, optional-None fields omitted.
Worked example: gsm8k-train-sample-v1-0001. Sentence 1 ("Tina makes
$18.00 an hour.") admits as a rate apply_rate operation; sentences 2
and 3 refuse at the leading "If" with unexpected_category
(conditional_frame is Phase-1 out-of-scope). The example demonstrates
the state model — that even when the reader refuses, the state at
the moment of refusal is what makes the refusal honest, typed, and
file-able as a teaching candidate.
Termination predicate is_terminable + finalize specified pure: a
ProblemReadingState becomes a strict ADR-0115 MathProblemGraph only
when entity registry is non-empty, unknown_target_slot is bound,
every accumulated op/initial references a known entity, and every
partial payload projects losslessly into the strict types.
Naming reconciliation: ADR-0164's sketched ComprehensionState is the
inner level under this ADR (SentenceReadingState). Brief 5 will
produce both types.
No code. ADR doc only.
Refs ADR-0164 §Open question #4.
Replace the regex sentence-template front-end of the math admissibility
layer with an incremental compositional reader. Lock the architectural
boundary that regex is permitted only at the lexeme level, never as
sentence-structure templates.
ADR-0164 (Proposed) — Incremental Comprehension Reader. Word-by-word
state accumulation over a closed set of semantic categories, with the
operational lexicon living as a pack-shaped data artifact under
language_packs/data/en_core_math_v1/. Reader output type matches the
existing regex parser's output, so the binding-graph admissibility
(ADR-0132/0133/0134/0135), the solver (ADR-0116), and the verifier
(ADR-0117) stay unchanged. wrong=0 is preserved by construction —
the reader produces inputs to the existing admissibility gate, not a
bypass around it. Phased coexistence with the regex layer during
transition; regex sentence templates removed in Phase 3.
ADR-0165 (Proposed) — Regex Scope Rule. Structural invariant: regex
matches one piece of orthographic material with a closed rule
(currency literal, fraction literal, percentage, time-amount, closed
unit-noun sets), never a sentence shape. Lexeme-primitive registry is
closed and grown through the same contemplation -> proposal -> HITL
review corridor that grows vocabulary (ADR-0150 / 0152 / 0155 / 0161).
The engine acquires new recognition tools through reviewed teaching,
not through operator edits to parser code.
ADR-0163's diagnosis (front-end is the bottleneck) is reaffirmed.
Its Phase B-E prescription (regex DerivedRecognizers via
recognizer_match.py) is partially superseded by ADR-0164. ADR-0136
and its S-family (S.1 / S.2 / S.3 / S.4) have the same disposition:
regex sentence-template prescription superseded; empirical refusal
taxonomies and closed-set vocabulary preserved as lexicon seed.
The HITL corridor architecture is preserved; what flows through it
changes from regex recognizers to lexicon entries, categories, and
lexeme primitives.
Session log SESSION-2026-05-26-comprehension-reader.md captures the
narrative of how this decision emerged from the post-D.2 train-sample
baseline review (correct=3 refused=47 wrong=0, 34/47 refusals at the
question gate).
No runtime code changes. ADRs only.
First PR plumbing recognizer parsed_anchors into the candidate-graph as
typed CandidateInitial primitives. Scope limited to discrete_count_statement;
other five round-2 categories route to the round-2 skip-only fallback until
follow-up D.2.x PRs.
Five-layer wrong=0 safety net:
1. Matcher narrowness — _try_extract_discrete_count_anchor refuses on any
ambiguity (multi-subject, pronoun subject, non-possession verb,
multi-count, clause-split, unobserved counted_noun, unobserved
count_kind).
2. Extraction correctness — refusal-preferring; populated parsed_anchors
only when ALL narrowness rules hold.
3. Injection correctness — _initial_admissible gates every constructed
CandidateInitial; failure to ground returns () (under-admit).
4. Replay gate — propose-time admissibility_replay_gate auto-rejects any
matcher change that would lift GSM8K wrong count.
5. Multi-branch decision rule — injected candidate disagreeing with
another branch triggers refuse path.
Re-baseline (GSM8K train_sample v1):
- Old (#309 alone): correct=3 refused=47 wrong=0
- New (#309 + D.2 v1): correct=3 refused=47 wrong=0
- Empirical lift in v1 = 0 cases; framework operational. No GSM8K
train_sample case has a discrete_count statement that simultaneously
meets all narrowness rules AND is missed by the existing parser.
Bottleneck moves to other recognizer categories (D.2.2+).
Validation:
- tests/test_adr_0163_d2_discrete_count_injection.py: 34 passed
- tests/test_recognizer_match.py + test_candidate_graph_recognizer_wiring
+ test_admissibility_replay_gate: 27 passed
- adr_0131_* (G1..G5 + S1 wrong=0 invariant): 222 passed / 2 pre-existing
report-comparison failures / 3 skipped — byte-identical to pre-D.2
- Solver code: unchanged
Operator caveat: round-1's ratified discrete_count_statement spec is
unchanged. Matcher behavior on the spec's canonical_pattern has been
extended from detection-only to populated parsed_anchors. Re-ratification
is not required; if policy requires it on matcher-behavior changes, the
registry digest provides byte-stable provenance.
Adds two pre-gate checks to propose_from_candidate that fire after the
Step 2 capacity check and before the replay gate. No log entry is
written on either refusal — the append-only invariant holds.
Check order at function entry (ADR-0161 §3):
1. Capacity (Step 2) → RefusedAtCapacity
2. Duplicate → RefusedAsDuplicate
3. Dependent_on_pending → RefusedAsDependent
4. Replay gate → auto-reject on regression
New frozen dataclasses:
@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)
class RefusedAsDuplicate:
proposal_id: str
existing_state: str # covers all states: pending/accepted/rejected/withdrawn
reason: str = "duplicate"
@dataclass(frozen=True, slots=True)
class RefusedAsDependent:
candidate_id: str
dependent_on: tuple[str, ...] # pending proposal_ids that block
overlapping_lemmas: tuple[str, ...] # normalised lemmas that triggered
reason: str = "dependent_on_pending"
Lemma-overlap rule: case-insensitive exact-match on strip().lower().
Conservative — over-reject rather than admit-with-hidden-dependency.
False positives are recoverable (re-emit after blocker is ratified);
false negatives silently couple ratification choices.
CLI surfaces both outcomes in cmd_teaching_propose and
cmd_teaching_propose_from_exemplars (exit code 1).
Step 2 backpressure tests updated: made pre-populated candidates use
unique objects to avoid triggering the new dependency check, and
updated idempotency assertions to reflect the new RefusedAsDuplicate
return for re-submitted content.
Co-references: ADR-0161 §3, Step 1 PR #296, Step 2 PR #311,
ADR-0057, ADR-0151.
Phase B round 2. Categorizing the post-#304 GSM8K train_sample's
still-refused 47 set surfaced three coherent sub-shapes in the previously
UNCATEGORIZED tail plus five ratified-but-narrowness-blocked temporal
cases; this PR ships the operator-authored exemplar seeds + Phase A
categorizer extension that prove the corridor scales beyond round 1.
Exemplar corpora (70 new exemplars across 4 files):
- discrete_count_statement_v1.jsonl (20)
- multiplicative_aggregation_v1.jsonl (20)
- currency_amount_v1.jsonl (20)
- temporal_aggregation_v2.jsonl (10, widening)
Each corpus carries ≥3 verbatim train-sample citations, ≥12 (≥5 for v2)
novel operator-authored statements, and ≥1–3 edge cases. Statements are
disjoint across all 7 round-1 + round-2 corpora; tests enforce.
Phase A categorizer (evals/refusal_taxonomy/shape_categories.py)
extends ShapeCategory with three new members and inserts their rule
predicates AFTER the existing more-specific categories:
- rate_with_currency before currency_amount
- multiplicative_aggregation before discrete_count_statement
Each new rule predicate cites ≥3 train_sample case_ids in its docstring
(ADR-0163 §Risks). No LLM, no embedding, no learned classifier.
Refusal-taxonomy histogram empirical signal (public 50 sample):
- pre-round-2: 14 UNCATEGORIZED (categorized_rate 0.72)
- post-round-2: 1 UNCATEGORIZED (categorized_rate 0.98)
The single residual is case 0044 ("10% simple interest" — percentage
without change verb), an honest tail outside the three round-2 shapes.
wrong=0 holds on capability axes G1..G5 + S1; no runtime code shipped.
Smoke suite green (67/67).
Cross-refs: ADR-0163, #297 (Phase A), #298 (Phase B round 1),
#301 (Phase C), #302 (Phase D), #304 (round-1 ratify), #305 (session
recap).
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Captures today's end-to-end closure of the math architecture corridor
(ADR-0163 Phase A → B → C → D + operator ratification, 15 PRs, first
non-zero GSM8K correct count: 0 → 3 with wrong = 0 preserved) and the
workbench surface (W-026 API + ADR-0162 design system + W-027 shell +
W-028 chat surface) becoming operational end-to-end.
Added:
- docs/sessions/SESSION-2026-05-26-corridor-closure.md — full session
ledger, per-fork accomplishments, three lifted GSM8K cases,
unexpected-positive observation about skip-only wiring, deferred
work, architectural state at close.
Updated:
- docs/master-plan-post-substrate-audit.md — 2026-05-26 amendment
banner pointing to the session recap; historical 2026-05-24 plan
preserved below.
- docs/PROGRESS.md — appended a new section capturing the day's 15
PRs by fork (math, workbench, HITL), the first-lift counts, and
what stays open.
- docs/decisions/ADR-0163-gsm8k-path-to-mastery.md — Round 1
amendment with the actual lift evidence, the three lifted cases,
the capability-axis preservation, and the unexpected-positive note
about skip-only wiring doing more than projected.
Scope: docs-only. No runtime, no tests, no code changes.
* chore(ADR-0163.C): land three Phase C pending proposals in live log
Phase C (#301) shipped the CLI but its PR dry-run wrote to a tmp log
path. This commit moves the three Phase C proposals into the live
teaching/proposals/proposals.jsonl so the Phase B→C audit trail is
visible in the proposal log and the proposals are ready for the
operator to ratify after Phase D ships.
Proposals (all state=pending, kind="exemplar_corpus"):
- 59223f13722f906a1cf9b65d9b01c990 — descriptive_setup_no_quantity
- 46ce297f797ff16da12db5de422ca3c9 — rate_with_currency
- a3b892546977c5f0f64c578d6052adbd — temporal_aggregation
Produced by `core teaching propose-from-exemplars --all` against the
live Phase B corpora. No ratification (ADR-0161 §5 — only the repo
owner ratifies). The Phase D admissibility-replay gate confirmed
replay_equivalent=true, wrong_count_delta=0 for all three.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
* feat(ADR-0163.D): wire ratified RecognizerSpecs into math_candidate_graph admissibility surface
Phase D is the first PR to extend the math admission surface. The
audit (#294) said the gap was admission, not operators, algebra,
substrate, or packs. Phase A measured the refusal taxonomy. Phase B
authored seeds. Phase C synthesized recognizers. Phase D wires
those recognizers into generate/math_candidate_graph.py.
Modules
- generate/recognizer_registry.py — pure projection over the proposal
log. Only proposals with source.kind="exemplar_corpus" AND
review_state="accepted" enter the tuple. Sorted by
(review_date, proposal_id). In-process cache keyed on log
(mtime, sha256) — no filesystem cache (ADR-0161 §1). Malformed
accepted specs raise RegistryLoadError citing the offending
proposal_id; silent drops are forbidden.
- generate/recognizer_match.py — per-category rules-only matchers
(no LLM, no embedding, no learned classifier). Honors the Phase C
synthesizer's narrowness rule: out-of-corpus currency symbols,
window units, and per-unit values do NOT match. Three matchers:
_match_descriptive_setup_no_quantity (zero-quantity surface),
_match_temporal_aggregation (event_count_per_window with
observed_window_units/quantifiers honored), _match_rate_with_currency
(currency_per_unit_rate with observed currency/per-unit/amount-kind
honored).
- generate/math_candidate_graph.py — narrowest-edit guard at the
per-statement choice loop. Before the existing
"no admissible candidate for statement" refusal, consult the
ratified registry. Recognized statements are dropped from
per_sentence_choices (zero math state) so the Cartesian product is
identical to "this statement was never there." Empty registry is
a no-op — backward compatibility preserved byte-identically.
Downstream consumption of parsed_anchors (turning recognized
rate/temporal surfaces into solver state that produces concrete
answers) is Phase E follow-up.
Tests (32 new)
- tests/_phase_d_fixture.py — synthetic in-memory ratified registry
built from the three Phase C pending proposals' content. Per
ADR-0161 §5 the agent does NOT ratify the live log; the synthetic
registry round-trips the real RecognizerSpec bytes the operator
will ratify after Phase D ships.
- tests/test_recognizer_registry.py (9) — empty/pending/wrong-kind
filtering, sort order, malformed-spec rejection, cache hit +
invalidation, live-log Phase C audit check.
- tests/test_recognizer_match.py (14) — per-category positive cases,
narrowness (out-of-corpus surface forms rejected), no-LLM import
check.
- tests/test_candidate_graph_recognizer_wiring.py (7) — empty registry
preserves existing refusal; synthetic registry: recognized
statements no longer trigger per-statement refusal;
wrong_count_delta == 0 on GSM8K train_sample; capability axes G1..
G5+S1 wrong=0 unchanged; per-category admission counts on the
refused-set; unrecognized statements still refuse with the
existing reason.
- tests/test_phase_d_replay_evidence.py (2) — full admissibility
replay gate under synthetic registry: replay_equivalent=true,
wrong_count_delta=0, every capability axis wrong=0; each
ratified recognizer admits >= 1 train_sample statement (wiring
is consequential).
Per-category fixture-based admission counts (synthetic registry vs
GSM8K train_sample refused-set sentences):
- descriptive_setup_no_quantity: 40
- rate_with_currency: 2
- temporal_aggregation: 7
Narrowness-invariant negative case results (matcher correctly
returns None on out-of-corpus / load-bearing-math surfaces):
- rate_with_currency: "She paid $5 for the book." (no per-unit)
- temporal_aggregation: "On Saturday she went to the store." (single day token)
- descriptive_setup_no_quantity: "There are some kids in camp." (indefinite quantifier)
Candidates for Phase B round 2 (3 of 20 temporal seeds match the
spec's structural commitment but not my surface regex — author_notes
explicitly flagged these as schema-gap edge cases):
- ta-v1-0004 "Mark does a gig every other day for 2 weeks."
- ta-v1-0012 "Robin walks 4 dogs every other day around the park."
- ta-v1-0019 "The pump fills the tank with 80 gallons over 6 hours."
Three landed wirings DO NOT shift the GSM8K train_sample baseline
counts under fixture (correct=3, wrong=0, refused=47 unchanged) —
Phase D's narrow wiring is wrong=0 safe by construction; lift to
"correct" requires Phase E's downstream parser-side consumption of
parsed_anchors. Capability axes G1..G5+S1 wrong=0 unchanged.
Cross-refs: ADR-0163 (Phase D), ADR-0057 (proposal review),
ADR-0151 (auto-proposal), ADR-0161 §5 (ratification boundary),
Phase A PR #297, Phase B PR #298, Phase C PR #301.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
---------
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Round 1 of ADR-0163 Phase B: hand-author seed exemplars for the top three
refusal shape categories surfaced by the Phase A histogram. These corpora
are INPUT to the Phase C contemplation runner, which will derive
DerivedRecognizer proposals from them; this PR ships no recognizer logic,
no proposal logging, and no runtime change.
Per-category breakdown:
- descriptive_setup_no_quantity_v1.jsonl — 20 exemplars (5 train + 12 novel + 3 edge)
- temporal_aggregation_v1.jsonl — 20 exemplars (4 train + 13 novel + 3 edge)
- rate_with_currency_v1.jsonl — 20 exemplars (3 train + 14 novel + 3 edge)
Train-sample citations resolve against
evals/gsm8k_math/train_sample/v1/report.json (the 50-case sample only;
public/holdout/full splits NOT mined per ADR-0163 §Constraints).
Each file is sorted by exemplar_id, byte-canonical, and disjoint from the
others. Statements are surface-preserved verbatim from the train sample
where cited.
Validation:
- tests/test_admissibility_exemplars.py: 20/20 passed (schema, enum
binding, per-category quantity_anchor dispatch, cross-file disjointness,
>=3 train-sample citations per category, sort/byte-canonical determinism,
read-only import invariant)
- tests/test_adr_0131_*.py: 224 passed / 3 skipped — capability axes
G1..G5 + S1 remain wrong=0
- core test --suite smoke: 67 passed
- core eval refusal_taxonomy: case_digest unchanged
(d030f826cb0f4088771d90c52c8be2ff75054ab27c7d47eae8dbfe1225b2eea1)
- Phase A categorize() agrees with the file's category for all 60
statements (sanity check; not pinned in tests since the rules-only
categorizer is coarser than the recognizer Phase C will derive)
Author notes on quantity_anchor annotation calls flagged for operator
review are embedded in provenance.author_note where ambiguous (notably:
'in N minutes' / 'over N hours' window framings collapsed to
window_quantifier='per', 'every other day' approximated as 'every',
day-of-week labels not captured in the schema, 'for one X' / slash-form
per-unit framings, non-USD currencies, and discrete-occurrence per_unit
values like 'event' and 'session').
Refs: ADR-0163 §Phase B; depends on the Phase A lane shipped in #297.
Cross-refs: ADR-0057 (proposal review), ADR-0149/0154 (recognizer
pipeline), ADR-0161 (HITL queue), [[thesis-decoding-not-generating]].
* docs(math): ADR-0163 — path to GSM8K mastery via candidate-graph admissibility (proposed)
Audit reframes the math roadmap entirely.
State of main: every named math capability axis (G1..G5, S1) passes
at 100% with wrong=0 on its controlled lane. binding_graph,
math_versor_arithmetic, math_symbolic_equivalence, math_parser,
math_candidate_parser, math_solver, math_verifier, math_realizer,
math_problem_graph — all landed. The worktrees on disk are stale
forks.
State of GSM8K (50-case train sample): correct=0, refused=50, wrong=0.
Every refusal reason is identical: "candidate_graph: no admissible
candidate for statement: <STATEMENT>".
The reframe: the gap is NOT in operator algebra, NOT in binding graph
internals, NOT in symbolic equivalence. The gap is in
generate/math_candidate_graph.py — the admissibility surface that
turns a natural-language statement into a candidate the downstream
pipeline can consume. The capability axes pass at 100% because they
test statement shapes the candidate-graph already admits. GSM8K
refuses at 100% because its statements span shapes the candidate-graph
has never been taught.
Six-phase plan to lift GSM8K under the thesis "decodes, not generates":
A. Refusal taxonomy (measure before building)
B. Exemplar corpora per shape category (≤20 statements each, ≤3 per round)
C. Contemplation runner ingests exemplars; emits DerivedRecognizer
proposals
D. Operator ratifies through ADR-0161 HITL queue (no new surface)
E. Re-baseline GSM8K train sample. Round 1 exit: correct ≥ 10, wrong = 0.
Round 2: ≥ 25. Round 3: ≥ 35.
F. Scale to public/v1 (200 cases, target correct ≥ 100), then
holdout (measurement-only — never tune against).
Three non-negotiables:
- wrong = 0 at every phase. Auto-rejected by replay gate, not by
operator vigilance.
- No hand-rolled recognizers in generate/. Every recognizer lands
via contemplation → proposal → review corridor.
- Active corpus mutation only via accept_proposal.
Status: proposed. Implementation lands as three PRs starting with
Phase A scaffolding.
Scope discipline: docs-only. No code, no eval changes, no corpus
mutation.
* feat(ADR-0161.1): core teaching queue list|show — read-only queue projection
* fix(ADR-0161.1): restore gap-queue CLI + rename new commands to hitl-queue + R1..R5 refinements
* feat(workbench-ui): design system v1 scaffold
* fix(workbench): close R1 (GroundingSource enum coverage) + R4 (digest test)
R1 — Promote GroundingSource to a typed Literal in core/epistemic_state.py
so it has the same single-source-of-truth shape as ReviewState. The
existing epistemic_state_for_grounding_source() function already
enumerates the six labels (pack, teaching, vault, partial, oov, none);
this codifies them.
scripts/dump-enums.py now snapshots GroundingSource via the existing
literal_values helper. workbench-ui's enumCoverage.test.ts gains a
fourth assertion that the badge mapping matches the Python source
1:1. Adding a grounding-source value on the Python side without
updating the badge fails the build-time test loud — same discipline
as the other three enums.
R4 — Add an explicit DigestBadge test to StableJsonViewer.test.tsx:
asserts the badge text matches the SHA-256 prefix of the source bytes,
and clicking the badge copies the FULL digest (not the truncated
prefix). Recomputes the expected digest via crypto.subtle to avoid
hard-coding a hex string that could drift.
R2 (component-level reduced-motion enforcement), R3 (EmptyState
copy-CLI affordance), and R5 (`uv run core` packaging paper cut) are
deferred — R2/R3 become meaningful with W-027/W-029, R5 is a
packaging-layer concern outside this PR's scope.
Validation:
- pnpm test: 19 passed (was 17, +1 enum coverage, +1 digest test)
- pnpm build: clean
- pnpm test:enum-coverage: 4 passed
- core test --suite smoke -q: 67 passed
