core/docs/adr/ADR-0047-wire-forward-graph-constraint.md

ADR-0047 — Wire the Forward Graph Constraint into the Chat Hot Path

Status: Accepted Date: 2026-05-18 Author: Shay

---

Context

ADR-0046 introduced generate/graph_constraint.py:build_graph_constraint — a function that converts a PropositionGraph into an AdmissibilityRegion before generate() runs. ADR-0046 explicitly deferred the hot-path wire-up:

"The coupling between chat/runtime.py and build_graph_constraint is available but the hot-path wire-up is a follow-up ADR (wire when the intent bridge returns a non-empty graph on the main path)."

This ADR closes that follow-up. As of merge, the only call site that built a PropositionGraph (generate/intent_bridge.py:articulate_with_intent) did so after generate() returned, using the walk's recalled tokens to fill <pending> object slots. The graph still described the field rather than constraining it.

---

Decision

1. Expose a public graph builder from generate/intent_bridge.py:

   def build_graph_from_input(text: str, plan: ArticulationPlan) -> PropositionGraph
   

   Same internal call as _build_graph_from_intent, just without the post-generation ground_graph step — suitable for forward use.

2. Add a config flag on RuntimeConfig:

   forward_graph_constraint: bool = False
   

   Default False preserves all pre-ADR-0046 behaviour.

3. In chat/runtime.py, when the flag is True and the runtime is operating on the English path, build the graph and the region before generate() and pass it through:

   forward_region = None
   if self.config.forward_graph_constraint and self.config.output_language == "en":
       pre_gen_graph = build_graph_from_input(text, articulation)
       forward_region = build_graph_constraint(pre_gen_graph, self._context.vocab)
   
   result = generate(
       ...,
       region=forward_region,
       ...,
   )
   

The post-generation articulate_with_intent path is left alone — it still grounds <pending> slots from the recalled tokens for surface realization.

---

Why opt-in, not always-on

A first attempt wired the constraint unconditionally on the English path and produced 15 test failures across the smoke and cognition suites:

generate.exhaustion.InnerLoopExhaustion:
  AdmissibilityRegion[graph:p0] left no walk candidates.

InnerLoopExhaustion (ADR-0024) is doing exactly what it is supposed to do — refusing honestly when the admissibility region's intersection with the walk's candidate pool is empty. The finding is that for many benign inputs the intent-derived graph's CGA neighbourhood does not intersect the walk's pool with top_k = 8 on the current pack sizes. Either:

• The graph's anchor surfaces are in vocabulary but their top-k geometric neighbourhood does not overlap with the language/salience- filtered candidate set produced by the walk on that field state, or
• The graph nodes use <pending> / function-word slots whose versors are not where the walk is operating.

The honest response to that finding is not to widen top_k until the failure goes away, and not to silently fall back to unconstrained — both would erase the architectural information that the geometry of the graph and the geometry of the walk are not yet co-located. Opt-in preserves the ADR-0024 refusal contract intact and lets operators observe the behaviour on their workloads before deciding whether to make it default-on.

This mirrors the ADR-0022 → ADR-0026 transition-window pattern: ship the capability behind a flag, characterise empirically, then decide on default behaviour in a follow-up.

---

Characterisation — core eval cognition

A/B run on the 13-case public cognition split, identical RuntimeConfig except for the flag:

Metric	Flag OFF	Flag ON	Δ
intent_accuracy	100.0 %	100.0 %	0
surface_groundedness	15.4 %	15.4 %	0
term_capture_rate	0.0 %	0.0 %	0
versor_closure_rate	100.0 %	100.0 %	0
InnerLoopExhaustion	0	0	0
Cases producing non-trivial constraint	n/a	6 / 13	—

Per-case constraint engagement (flag ON):

Case	Subject	Region
Why does knowledge require evidence?	"does knowledge require evidence"	graph:unconstrained
Why does light exist?	"does light exist"	graph:unconstrained
Compare memory and recall	"memory"	graph:p0
No, correction means reviewed repair	", correction means reviewed repair"	graph:p0
What is knowledge?	"knowledge"	graph:p0
What is light?	"light"	graph:p0
What is meaning?	"meaning"	graph:p0
What is a procedure?	"a procedure"	graph:unconstrained
What is a relation?	"a relation"	graph:unconstrained
How can I correct an error?	"correct an error"	graph:unconstrained
Remember light	"light"	graph:p0
light logos	"light logos"	graph:unconstrained
Does memory require recall?	"Does memory require recall?"	graph:unconstrained

What this tells us

• Wiring is correct and safe. No exhaustions; closure unchanged; intent classification unchanged. When the graph names a single in-vocabulary concept (light, knowledge, meaning, memory, correction), the constraint engages.
• Multi-word subject phrases bypass the constraint. The intent classifier returns the full subject phrase ("does light exist", "a procedure"); the graph builder uses this directly; none of those multi-word surfaces are present in en_core_cognition_v1, so the graph builder produces a node whose subject surface is OOV and build_graph_constraint falls back to unconstrained. This is not a bug in the constraint — it is the existing intent-classifier contract surfacing into the geometry layer.
• The cognition lane's grounding gap is not in the candidate set. Six cases narrow the walk's admissible vocabulary, yet surface_groundedness and term_capture_rate are byte-identical. Restricting which tokens the walk may visit did not change what surface gets emitted on this lane. The surface-grounding gap therefore lives downstream of propagation — in the realizer / surface-assembly / dialogue role-resolution path — and is the next load-bearing pull. This isolates the next ADR's scope.

---

Consequences

What changes

• chat/runtime.py now calls build_graph_constraint before generate() when forward_graph_constraint is enabled.
• generate/intent_bridge.py exposes build_graph_from_input as a public helper. _build_graph_from_intent retained for internal use.
• RuntimeConfig gains one opt-in field; frozen dataclass contract preserved.

What does not change

• generate() signature is unchanged (region already accepted via ADR-0022).
• Default runtime behaviour is byte-identical to pre-ADR-0047 main.
• ADR-0024 honest-refusal contract is intact — when an operator enables the flag on inputs that produce a too-tight constraint, the runtime refuses rather than silently relaxing.
• versor_condition < 1e-6 invariant is unaffected (constraint filters indices, not rotor construction).

Scope limits

• The graph builder is English-specific; the runtime guard restricts forward-constraint computation to output_language == "en".
• The behaviour of the constraint on multi-word OOV subject phrases is the current intent-classifier contract — narrowing it (subject- span normalisation, single-token reduction) is out of scope and a candidate follow-up.
• top_k = 8 is inherited from ADR-0046's default; this ADR does not re-tune it. An eval that does differentiate flag ON vs OFF will need to land before any tuning is justified.

---

Cross-References

• ADR-0018 — original intent_bridge producing the post-hoc graph.
• ADR-0022 — the AdmissibilityRegion contract this ADR feeds into.
• ADR-0024 — the honest- refusal contract that fires when the constraint is too tight; the reason this ADR is opt-in.
• ADR-0046 — the constraint primitive that this ADR wires into the live path.

---

Verification

tests/test_forward_graph_constraint_wiring.py  — 5 tests, all green

Lanes (all green on this branch):
  core test --suite smoke         67 passed
  core test --suite cognition    121 passed
  core test --suite runtime       19 passed
  core test --suite algebra      132 passed
  core test --suite teaching      17 passed
  core test --suite packs          6 passed
  core eval cognition            metrics unchanged from main
                                 (flag OFF default = pre-ADR-0047)

The non-negotiable field invariant (versor_condition(F) < 1e-6) remains satisfied: this ADR only changes which indices the walk considers — it does not touch rotor construction, sandwich application, or field update.