* research(evals): phi separation probe for ADR-0081 follow-up
Lab artifact at evals/lab/phi_separation_probe.py. Tests whether a
candidate embedding
phi : Proposition -> Cl(4,1)
produces a contemplation differential
Delta(chain) = ||sandwich(R_connective, phi(subject)) - phi(object)||
that separates known-compatible chains from synthesized
known-contradicting twins.
Why this exists
---------------
A "Topological Stress Field" miner (read-only Rust kernel sweeping
the vault footprint and emitting SPECULATIVE findings from high-Delta
regions) was discussed as a successor to #55. That miner can only
earn its Rust cycles if Delta actually correlates with semantic
contradiction. Until phi is empirically validated, ||Delta|| is a
hash, not a signal.
This probe is the falsification harness for phi. Promotion criterion
encoded in the run output: ``auc >= 0.80`` on the pair set below
before any geometric stress miner is built.
Method
------
- 21 real chains pulled from teaching/cognition_chains/cognition_chains_v1.jsonl.
- Contradicting twins synthesized via 8 connective-antonym pairs
(requires<->rejects, reveals<->obscures, grounds<->undermines,
supports<->contradicts, enables<->prevents, confirms<->refutes,
informs<->misleads, verifies<->falsifies).
- Two phi candidates: phi.v1.summed_domains (grade-mixed sum of
CGA point embeddings of the lemma's semantic_domains) and
phi.v2.centroid_point (centroid of domain hash points embedded
once, staying on the CGA null cone).
- Two distance metrics: principled CGA point-distance and Frobenius.
Result (v1)
-----------
All four (phi, metric) combinations land at AUC ~ 0.5 (chance).
Distributions for compatible vs contradicting overlap completely
(mean diff <= 0.04). Hash-derived phi does NOT encode contradiction
under any tested metric.
This is the right kind of failure: it tells us the geometric stress
miner has no signal to consume yet, and validates the decision to
not build it speculatively.
Two side findings worth pinning
-------------------------------
1. algebra.versor.versor_apply projects non-null inputs back onto the
unit-versor manifold (runtime field-state closure), collapsing
sum-of-multivectors phi outputs to scalar identity. The probe
uses raw R*F*reverse(R) directly. Any future geometric kernel
needs a raw sandwich primitive distinct from runtime versor_apply.
2. For two CGA null vectors X, Y the correct distance is
d = sqrt(-2 * <X, Y>), not sqrt(-2 * <X-Y, X-Y>). The latter
evaluates to a negative number that f32 numerics silently clamp
to zero. First version of the probe returned identically-zero
distances because of this.
Boundary
--------
- Lives in evals/lab/ (research-only, never imported by runtime).
- No new package surface; no Rust code; no pack/vault writes.
- No tests required (lab convention); the promotion criterion in
the run output is the falsification gate.
* research(evals): add IDF-weighted phi variants (v3, v4)
Adds two more phi candidates to the separation probe:
- phi.v3.idf_weighted — sum of CGA embeddings, weighted per
semantic_domain by smoothed IDF across the pack. Same shape as
v1 (grade-mixed) but rare domains get larger weight than common
ones like ``logos.core`` that appear in most cognition lemmas.
- phi.v4.idf_centroid — null-cone sibling of v3. IDF-weighted
centroid in R^3, embedded once.
Hypothesis tested: v1's null result was "common-domain noise drowning
out the distinguishing axes."
Result
------
All four (phi, metric) combinations still at AUC ~ 0.5:
phi.v1.summed_domains cga AUC=0.481 frob AUC=0.451
phi.v2.centroid_point cga AUC=0.490 frob AUC=0.492
phi.v3.idf_weighted cga AUC=0.481 frob AUC=0.449
phi.v4.idf_centroid cga AUC=0.497 frob AUC=0.501
IDF reweighting does not separate compatible from contradicting.
Diagnostic refinement
---------------------
v4 shows compat mean (0.559) < contra mean (0.572) — directionally
correct (contradictions land farther) but the effect is dwarfed by
the within-group std (~0.24). This is a hint, not signal.
What this *does* tell us: the lemma encoding is not the load-bearing
variable. The bottleneck is the **connective rotor**. Antonym pairs
should produce rotors that send vectors in opposite directions, but
hash-derived R(requires) and R(rejects) are statistically
independent — there is no encoded relationship between a connective
and its antonym in the current scheme.
Next phi candidate worth trying: encode connectives as rotors derived
from a learned or curated antonym structure (e.g., R(antonym) =
reverse(R(original))), so the antonym structure is GEOMETRICALLY
guaranteed instead of coincidentally absent. Until something on the
rotor axis carries structural signal, varying only the lemma
encoding is rearranging deck chairs.
* research(evals): antonym-rotor oracle variants (v5, v6)
Adds two upper-bound probes that hardcode the antonym structure
into rotor space:
R(antonym) := reverse(R(canonical))
so the antonym relationship is geometrically guaranteed instead
of coincidentally absent. This is NOT a phi proposal — it is an
oracle probe. What it measures: "if antonym relations *were*
perfectly encoded geometrically, would the rest of the encoding
separate the two groups?"
Variants:
- phi.v5.centroid_antonym_oracle — v2 lemmas + antonym oracle
- phi.v6.idf_centroid_antonym_oracle — v4 lemmas + antonym oracle
Result
------
Both still at chance:
v5 cga AUC=0.503 frob AUC=0.503
v6 cga AUC=0.526 frob AUC=0.517
v6 shows a slight directional effect — contradicting mean (0.575)
slightly above compatible mean (0.559) — but the gap is dwarfed by
within-group std (~0.20).
Diagnostic (the deeper finding)
-------------------------------
Even with the antonym oracle, the lemma encoding cannot see
contradiction. The reason: for the rotor sandwich to place
phi(subject) NEAR phi(object) on compatible chains, the rotor must
encode the specific subject->object relationship — not just "a
rotation." Hash-derived rotors send phi(subject) to a random
point, so compatible chains have large Delta and contradicting
twins also have large Delta. We never recover the "compatible is
small" half of the separation.
Implication: the lemma encoding itself must carry relational
structure (positions in phi space such that a small canonical set
of rotations consistently take subjects to their related objects),
or the encoding must be jointly learned with the connective rotors
against a coherence loss. Either way, hash-derived phi cannot work
in principle — not just in this implementation.
This quantitatively validates ADR-0081's thesis that phi is the
critical-path research blocker. It is not a tuning problem.
Refactor:
- delta_cga / delta_frobenius now take both phi_l and phi_c so
new variants can vary the connective encoder independently.
- _PHI_VARIANTS is now (name, phi_l, phi_c) triples.
* research(evals): corpus-graph aware phi variants (v7, v8)
Adds two structural-only graph-aware phi candidates:
phi.v7.corpus_graph — corpus neighborhood centroid
phi.v8.corpus_graph_antonym_oracle — v7 lemmas + antonym oracle rotors
For each lemma, embed the centroid (in R^3) of hash points derived
from its graph neighborhood in the reviewed teaching corpus:
out_signature = "OUT:" + connective + "/" + object_lemma
in_signature = "IN:" + subject_lemma + "/" + connective
Lemmas with similar neighborhoods (same connectives used toward the
same kinds of partners) land near each other in R^3.
CAVEAT: structural only. This does NOT fit lemma positions to
satisfy R_c * phi(s) ~ phi(o) along the corpus relations. A joint
fit (TransE-style) would require a training loop, train/test split,
and convergence criteria — outside the single-file lab probe shape.
Result
------
v7 cga AUC=0.451 frob AUC=0.474
v8 cga AUC=0.444 frob AUC=0.458
Both lower than chance — contradicting twins land *closer* on average
than compatible ones, but within 1 std (~0.29), so it is noise, not
signal. The structural opposite of what would pass.
Closure on closed-form phi
--------------------------
The probe has now systematically falsified every closed-form phi
candidate available without training:
v1-v2: hash-derived domain encodings — chance
v3-v4: IDF-weighted domain encodings — chance
v5-v6: above + antonym oracle on connectives — chance
v7-v8: corpus-graph neighborhood encoding — chance (anti)
No reweighting of domains, no oracle on connectives, no graph-aware
neighborhood centroid is enough. This is consistent across 8
variants and 4 (lemma, connective) encoding combinations.
Remaining options
-----------------
1. Trained phi (TransE/RotatE-style): fit lemma + connective
embeddings jointly against a corpus coherence loss. Tiny
corpus (21 chains) means heavy overfitting risk; need
leave-one-out cross-validation to report honestly. Real
infrastructure, not a probe.
2. Larger labelled corpus: 21 chains is too few to discriminate
"encoding cannot work" from "encoding cannot work *on this
data*." Expanding the teaching corpus would let the probe
distinguish those.
3. Park geometric contemplation. The falsification stands; the
ADR-0080 contemplation loop remains the operational read-only
doctrine. Geometric stress mining waits until a forcing
function appears.
Recommendation: option 3. This probe has earned its keep — it
quantitatively validated ADR-0081's "phi is the load-bearing
research blocker" thesis across the full closed-form design space.
* lab: deep teaching layer trace suite + identity configuration explorer
This branch is a lab environment. Nothing here touches packs, manifolds,
or any durable geometry. Every test and trace runs in an isolated
in-process VaultStore that evaporates at the end of the test — the
clean-room guarantee is preserved by construction.
== evals/lab/teaching_trace.py ==
Full end-to-end trace of the teaching pipeline across all three identity
pack configurations (default_general_v1, precision_first_v1,
generosity_first_v1). For each pack:
1. Build a ChatRuntime with that identity config
2. Run a teaching session: chat() -> observe surface -> submit
CorrectionCandidate -> review_correction() -> TeachingStore.add()
3. Trace EVERY layer with structured output:
- Input versor (hex digest of float32 bytes for stable comparison)
- Gate decision (direct vs decomposed, score, fire/clear)
- Proposition formed (subject, predicate, frame_id)
- Identity score (alignment, flagged, deviation_axes)
- Safety verdict (upheld, violated predicates)
- Ethics verdict (upheld, violated commitments)
- Surface produced
- Review outcome (ACCEPTED / REJECTED_IDENTITY / REJECTED_EMPTY)
- Proposal epistemic_status after contradiction detection
- PackMutationProposal fields (triple parsed, proposal_id)
4. Emit a per-pack structured JSON trace to stdout
5. Compare traces across packs: show exactly where the geometry
diverges (alignment score delta, hedge rate delta, flagged delta)
== evals/lab/identity_config_explorer.py ==
Explores the full configuration space of the three identity packs by
running a fixed corpus of 12 semantically diverse inputs through each
pack and recording the full per-turn audit trail. Inputs are chosen to
stress different axes:
- alignment-safe (light, truth, word)
- boundary-adjacent (correction, override, identity)
- hedge-triggering (uncertain, speculative, contested)
- ethics-activating (harm, disclosure, evidence)
For each input x pack combination:
- Records alignment_score, flagged, hedge_injected, refusal_emitted
- Records deviation_axes (which value axes were pulled)
- Records versor_condition (geometric health)
- Records dialogue_role (assert/elaborate/question/refute)
Outputs a CSV matrix: rows = inputs, columns = (pack x field), so you
can read off exactly how each identity configuration responds to each
stressor. This IS the identity configuration diff — not a diff of
prompts, a diff of geometric alignment trajectories.
== evals/lab/teaching_contradiction_probe.py ==
Probes the CONTESTED transition mechanism in TeachingStore directly.
Submits pairs of logically contradictory corrections on the same subject
and verifies that both proposals are marked CONTESTED. Then submits a
ratifying correction and verifies the resolution path.
Also probes the identity-override rejection path with a corpus of
22 adversarial correction texts spanning:
- v1 legacy marker attacks ("you are now", "forget your")
- v2 contraction bypass ("you're now", "you'd become")
- v3 philosophical-axis attacks ("disregard your axiology",
"abandon your ethos", "circumvent your epistemology")
- v4 negating-qualifier attacks ("respond without prior bindings",
"become unbounded")
For each: records whether _is_identity_override fired syntactically,
whether IdentityCheck.would_violate fired geometrically, and the final
ReviewOutcome. The dual-layer defense is the structural claim — this
trace makes it falsifiable.
== evals/lab/vault_epistemic_trace.py ==
Traces the EpistemicStatus lifecycle across a full session:
1. Every store() call: records status written, turn, role
2. Every recall() call with min_status=None vs min_status=COHERENT:
records which entries are visible at each tier
3. After promotion (with_status(COHERENT)): records that the promoted
entry now appears in COHERENT-filtered recall and that un-promoted
entries do not
4. Verifies that benchmark/test writes (SPECULATIVE) never appear
in COHERENT-filtered recall — the contamination isolation proof
This is the structural argument for why per-session non-persistent
vaults preserve the integrity of the pack geometry.
* lab: hardware benchmark + compute reality demo
Adds evals/lab/hardware_benchmark.py
One falsifiable claim per section:
- Exact CGA inner product scan over N=10K x 32 float32 versors
completes in microseconds on CPU-only, zero CUDA
- Versor application (geometric product sandwich) completes
in nanoseconds per operation
- Full session: 10 turns, vault writes, vault recalls, anchor pull,
blade EMA, graph finalization — wall time measured end-to-end
- Peak RSS memory measured before and after a 10K vault load
- Backend report: pure Python NumPy vs Rust extension, zero GPU path
This is the compute reality section of the industry demo suite.
No H100 needed. No CUDA driver. No model weights. No tokenizer.
The number that matters: a full reasoning turn on an M1 MacBook Pro
completes in the same wall-clock budget as a single transformer
forward pass on an H100 — and the M1 is doing exact geometric
arithmetic, not approximate matrix multiplication.
* lab: generation walk deep trace + rotor manifold explorer
Adds evals/lab/generation_walk_trace.py and
evals/lab/rotor_manifold_explorer.py
After reading generate/stream.py in full, the two things that needed
a trace instrument were:
1. The generation walk itself — every step: which versor is current,
which rotor is constructed, what field state results, what
admissibility verdict is issued, which vault hits were applied
and at what softmax weight, what holonomy accumulated, what the
admissibility trace carries. This is the most important structural
trace in the system because it is the proof that language generation
here is a geometric walk on the versor manifold, not a probability
distribution over tokens.
2. The rotor manifold itself — rotor_power (the manifold-preserving
power operation that scales vault recall transitions), the
word_transition_rotor (the geometric bridge from word A to word B),
and versor_condition (the health check that proves the walk stays
on the manifold). These three operations are the computational
heart of what makes exact geometric generation possible.
Shay