Follow-on to the word-boundary fix (commit 0dd30b8). After tightening
``\bno\b`` etc. with word boundaries, an audit surfaced a separate
pre-existing gap in the CORRECTION trigger: the contracted-only
``that'?s\s+(?:not|wrong)`` slot silently dropped every fully-spoken
copula form to UNKNOWN.
Concrete gap (every one previously UNKNOWN):
"That is not right." → UNKNOWN
"That is wrong." → UNKNOWN
"That was wrong." → UNKNOWN
"That is incorrect." → UNKNOWN
"That is false." → UNKNOWN
"That was not right." → UNKNOWN
"that is mistaken." → UNKNOWN
"That was incorrect." → UNKNOWN
Root cause: the slot ``that'?s\s+(?:not|wrong)`` matches only
that's / thats
— ``'?s`` makes the apostrophe optional but the literal ``s`` is
mandatory. ``that is`` (full word ``is``) and ``that was`` (full
word ``was``) had no path. And the predicate alternation only
accepted ``not`` or ``wrong``; ``incorrect``, ``false``, and
``mistaken`` were also missing.
Fix: widen both slots in one pattern revision.
Before:
that'?s\s+(?:not|wrong)
After:
that(?:'?s|\s+(?:is|was))\s+(?:not|wrong|incorrect|false|mistaken)
The full pattern now reads:
\b(?:no
|that(?:'?s|\s+(?:is|was))\s+(?:not|wrong|incorrect|false|mistaken)
|incorrect
|actually
|correction)\b
Boundary discipline holds: the outer ``\b...\b`` still prevents the
predicate alternation from eating into longer words. Verified:
"That is correct." → UNKNOWN (right NOT in predicate set)
"That is right." → UNKNOWN (right NOT in predicate set)
"That is true." → UNKNOWN (true NOT in predicate set)
"That works." → UNKNOWN
"That is interesting." → UNKNOWN
"That is falsifiable." → UNKNOWN (``false`` + ``i`` is word→word
so ``\b`` after ``false`` fails)
"That was wrongly accused." → UNKNOWN (same logic for ``wrong``+``ly``)
Tests extended:
* ``test_correction_canonical_forms_still_route`` — 8 new parametrize
cases for the fully-spoken copula forms
* ``test_correction_does_not_eat_no_prefixed_words`` — 9 new
parametrize cases for the affirmative ``That is/was ...`` shape
AND the boundary-trap cases ``falsifiable`` / ``wrongly accused``
Verified:
pytest tests/test_intent_subject_extraction.py 33/33 pass
full intent + register-diagnostic + proposition graph 77/77 pass
core test --suite smoke 67/67 pass
core test --suite runtime 19/19 pass
c945b9a045