core/docs/audit/substrate-liveness-ratchet.md
Shay bf3baa8bfa
docs(audit): ratchet v4 — audit complete (9/9), W-004 closed, W-015 (#253)
investigated, four new entries from L8

Audit milestone: all 9 substrate layers audited. L8 (PR #250) and
L9 (PR #249) merged to close the audit phase. The ratchet transitions
from "audit-driven entry addition" to "wiring-progress driven
closure."

Status updates:

- W-004  CLOSED via PR #251 (first non-trivial wiring closure from
  the audit). Vault recall now stamps E2 EnergyProfile per ADR-0006.
  Unlocks W-005 (energy-modulated readback now meaningful).
- W-015  INVESTIGATED via PR #252 (Sonnet). Verdict (c) confirmed
  with bimodal-distribution evidence across 4,138 samples. Root cause:
  _slerp_toward interpolates on S^31 but versor manifold is a proper
  subset. Fix in flight (rotor geodesic via Lie group exponential).

Four new W-NNN entries from L8 audit:

- W-016 — Contemplation operates without vault probe. Independent
  mechanical fix at ChatRuntime._emit_discovery_candidates call site.
- W-017 — Automated T1/T2 → T3 promotion absent (ADR-0055's own
  "what is missing"). Chained: needs W-009 (HITL async queue) +
  W-016 (vault probe) first.
- W-018 — ADR-0080 contemplation not autonomous. Chained: needs W-008
  (L10 runtime model) first.
- W-019 — from_miner.py / from_curriculum.py test-live only. Operator
  decision: CLI wiring (smallest), runtime invocation (via W-017), or
  document as offline-library-only.

L9 audit added no new W-NNN entries; the refusal-reason
materialization matrix consolidates prior findings (W-011, W-012)
from the verdict-surface side. Safety, opt-in ethics, default-audit
ethics, and hedge injection all CLOSED in the matrix per design.

Updated:
- Title v3 → v4
- Subtitle "L0-L7 + L10 scope" → "L0-L9 + L10 scope"
- Dependency graph: W-004 marked FIXED, W-015 marked INVESTIGATED,
  new entries placed in their dependency lanes
- Suggested next-ADR sequence reordered: W-015 fix leads (in flight),
  followed by W-011, W-012, W-016 as the quick-wins lane
- Items-deferred section transitioned from "L8-L9 pending" to "audit
  complete; future revisions are wiring-progress driven"

Tally so far: 5 of 19 W-NNN entries closed (W-001, W-002, W-004
fully closed; W-015 investigated and fix in flight; the rest of the
quick-wins lane is now safely dispatchable post-L9).
2026-05-24 19:52:49 -07:00

554 lines
27 KiB
Markdown

# Substrate Liveness Ratchet — v4 (audit complete; informed by L0-L9 + L10 scope)
**Scope:** [substrate-liveness-audit-scope](../decisions/substrate-liveness-audit-scope.md) (v2)
**Companion:** [substrate-liveness-registry](./substrate-liveness-registry.md)
**Status:** Active — append-only; revised as audit findings (L4-L9) and operator review refine the sequence.
---
## Purpose
The substrate-liveness audit produces evidence; the ratchet derives **the
order in which wiring debt should be paid down**. Each entry names a
wiring gap surfaced by the audit, identifies the dependencies that must
land first, and points at the ADR (existing or proposed) that will
close it.
The ratchet is not a roadmap of features. It is the dependency-ordered
playbook for transitioning CORE from "subset of design executes" to
"design executes" — what the operator and the audit-scope call **live
mode readiness**.
**This is v1, drafted with L0-L3 + L10 scope landed.** L4-L9 audits are
either in flight or pending; the ratchet will be revised as their
findings land. Wiring items that touch unaudited layers carry an
explicit *audit-dependency* flag.
---
## Wiring debt registry (current)
Each entry: **W-NNN** | what's broken | source | dependency | proposed
home (ADR-XXXX or new).
### W-001 — Versor-condition threshold rot (FIXED)
- **Surfaced by:** L1 audit (PR #237).
- **Gap:** `ingest/gate.py` documented contract `versor_condition < 1e-6`
but raised only at `> 1e-5`; architectural-invariants test pinned the
weaker threshold.
- **Resolution:** PR #239 (Codex). Threshold tightened to `< 1e-6`;
test updated. Verified by full audit-spectrum suite runs.
- **Status:** ✅ CLOSED. Recorded here for completeness — the ratchet
retains its history.
### W-002 — ADR-0097 ledger-status test orphan (FIXED)
- **Surfaced by:** PR #239 verification (Codex's full-suite run).
- **Gap:** `test_status_meets_reasoning_capable_at_minimum` accepted
`{reasoning-capable, audit-passed}` but ADR-0120 had promoted
`mathematics_logic` to `expert` without updating the test.
- **Resolution:** PR #240. One-token extension.
- **Status:** ✅ CLOSED. Cleanup discipline applied per
[[feedback-cleanup-as-you-find]].
### W-003 — `VaultPromotionPolicy` dormant
- **Surfaced by:** L2 audit (PR #238); also flagged in
recognizer-storage-scope v2 (PR #232).
- **Gap:** `core/physics/learning.py` defines `VaultPromotionPolicy`
(ADR-0014). 0 live callers, 0 test callers outside `core/physics/`.
The field-energy/promotion lattice has its energy half wired (L1
audit confirms `FieldEnergyOperator` is live at three callers) but
the promotion half is dormant.
- **Dependency:** L10 (runtime model) — promotion timing depends on
when the field→vault transition is decided to fire (per-turn?
per-session boundary? long-lived process?).
- **Proposed home:** new ADR after L10 commits — *"wire
`VaultPromotionPolicy` into the runtime promotion path"*. Sized for
a small focused ADR once L10's process-shape decision is made.
- **Recognizer-storage dependency:** the recognizer-storage ADR
explicitly depends on this wiring (its content cannot crystallize
if the lattice's promotion gate isn't running).
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — audit-dependency on L10.
### W-004 — Vault re-thaw path specified-not-verified-live (FIXED)
- **Surfaced by:** L2 audit (PR #238); L1 audit (PR #237) forward-noted
the same concern.
- **Gap:** ADR-0006 §"Integration Points" specifies "Vault recall
transiently raises region to E2, then lets it cool again." L2 audit
traced `vault.recall` callers and found that recall did NOT update
or re-raise the energy class/profile of recalled entries.
- **Resolution:** PR #251. `vault/store.py` now stamps each
`recall()` / `recall_batch()` result with a module-level
`_VAULT_RECALL_RETHAW_ENERGY` singleton (raw=0.50, E2 mid-band).
Cool-down remains downstream propagation's responsibility. 6 new
tests in `tests/test_vault_recall_rethaw.py` pin the contract; lane
SHAs preserved (byte-identity intact).
- **Unlocks:** W-005 — E0/E2 distinction now exists at the runtime
data shape, so energy-modulated surface readback becomes
meaningful.
- **Status:** ✅ CLOSED.
### W-005 — E0/E2 readback modulation absent
- **Surfaced by:** L3 audit (PR #241), confirming L2's forward note,
confirming L1's note about energy → surface coupling.
- **Gap:** `packs/common/runtime_rules.py:readback_from_intent` receives
`field_state.energy` but silently treats E0 (vault crystal),
E1 (warm), E2 (active), E3 (peak) identically. ADR-0006/0007
specify energy-class-dependent tense, framing, and hedging
modulation that is not implemented.
- **Dependency:** W-004 first (until vault recall re-thaws, E0 vs E2
distinction is moot at runtime — every recalled region is stuck at
E0 anyway). Could be specified-and-implemented before W-004 but the
user-visible behavior change requires W-004.
- **Proposed home:** new ADR — *"energy-modulated surface readback per
ADR-0006/0007"*. Likely an extension of `generate/realizer.py` since
L3 audit confirmed surface generation is done there, not in pack
readback rules.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — sequence: W-004 → W-005.
### W-006 — Local pack readback rules dormant
- **Surfaced by:** L3 audit (PR #241).
- **Gap:** `packs/<lang>/readback_rules.py` files (en, el, grc, he)
exist with 0 live callers. Surface generation goes through
`generate/realizer.py` instead. The per-language readback path is
spec-in-code that nothing uses.
- **Dependency:** none (independent).
- **Resolution path:** either (a) wire pack-readback into surface
generation per original intent, or (b) accept that
`generate/realizer.py` superseded the design and DELETE the dormant
pack-readback modules per [[feedback-cleanup-as-you-find]].
- **Recommended:** decision belongs to operator review. If (b), it's a
cleanup PR, not a wiring ADR. If (a), it's a new ADR explaining why
pack-readback regains primacy.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — operator decision required before sequencing.
### W-007 — `DerivedRecognizer` integration into live turn loop
- **Surfaced by:** ADR-0144 commit body + recognizer-storage-scope v2.
- **Gap:** `core/cognition/pipeline.py:121` accepts
`recognizer: DerivedRecognizer | None = None`. Nothing in main
constructs or passes a recognizer. The anti-unifier (ADR-0143) and
the carrier (ADR-0144) are live in isolation; they are not yet wired
into the turn loop.
- **Dependency:** recognizer-storage-scope's question must be answered
first (where do recognizers come from at turn time? — see W-003 for
the storage-layer dependency).
- **Proposed home:** new ADR after recognizer-storage decision lands.
Likely titled *"integrate `DerivedRecognizer` into
`CognitiveTurnPipeline`"*. Sized after the storage ADR commits.
- **Note for L4 audit:** verify this gap survives a fresh audit.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — chained: W-003 → recognizer-storage ADR →
W-007.
### W-008 — Runtime model (L10) scope adoption
- **Surfaced by:** recognizer-storage-scope v2 and audit-scope v2 both
named runtime model as missing prerequisite.
- **Gap:** No ADR specifies the process shape for forever-running
CORE. Today: `core` CLI is one-shot; no long-lived process;
capability does not accumulate across invocations. The audit-scope
flagged L10 as "not an audit target — prerequisite the audit will
surface need for." That prerequisite is now load-bearing.
- **Resolution path:** PR #236 landed the L10 scope. Next: ADR (or ADR
cluster) committing to process shape A/B/C (per L10 scope
sub-question 1), state partitioning, reboot recovery, HITL async.
- **Dependency:** none for the scope→ADR transition; informed by L4-L9
audit findings as they land.
- **Proposed home:** new ADR — *"runtime model for forever-running
CORE (L10 commit)"*. Large; may split into ADR cluster.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — scope landed (#236); spike/ADR pending.
### W-009 — HITL async queue surface
- **Surfaced by:** recognizer-storage v2 (drop-off ADR named); L10
scope sub-question 4.
- **Gap:** ADR-0057 establishes append-only proposal log + operator
review machinery. Currently consumed only by `core teaching_*` CLI
commands (synchronous). For forever-running engine, the queue
becomes async: operator reviews while engine continues serving
turns.
- **Dependency:** W-008 (runtime model) — async queue shape depends on
process model.
- **Proposed home:** new ADR after W-008. Per recognizer-storage v2,
*"the drop-off ADR's load-bearing originality is the trigger
(recency) and the gate (not replay-equivalence). The review-and-log
half is a small extension to existing machinery."*
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — chained: W-008 → W-009.
### W-010 — L4 recognition bypasses L3 vocabulary
- **Surfaced by:** L4 audit (PR #243), confirming L3 audit's forward
question (PR #241).
- **Gap:** `derive_recognizer()` and `recognize()` operate on raw token
sequences and taught `FeatureBundle` evidence without consuming L3's
compiled `VocabManifold`, domain namespaces, or pack-resident
lexicon. Grep across `recognition/` confirms no `VocabManifold` /
`language_packs` / `load_pack` / `compiled` / `lexicon` / `vocab`
references except a prose comment in `outcome.py`.
- **Dependency:** operator decision — is the token-level spike
intentional (raw tokens are the right substrate for anti-unification)
or transitional (recognition will eventually plug into L3 vocabulary
for richer typed slots)?
- **Resolution paths:**
- **(a)** Document as intentional in ADR-0143 amendment. No code
change. Recognition stays token-level by design.
- **(b)** Wire `VocabManifold` consumption into `derive_recognizer()`
via new ADR. Larger change; would let recognition reference
pack-resident domain types in feature slots.
- **Recommended:** operator decision. Per the thesis, token-level may
be the right level (anti-unification doesn't *need* pack vocabulary
— it derives its own structure); pack consumption may be premature
generalization.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — operator decision required.
### W-011 — Typed recognition refusals dropped at pipeline boundary
- **Surfaced by:** L4 audit (PR #243).
- **Gap:** `CognitiveTurnPipeline` calls `recognize()` and, on
admission, wraps the outcome in an `EpistemicGraph` carrier. On
refusal, `_rec_outcome.refusal_reason` is **discarded**
`CognitiveTurnResult.refusal_reason` is populated from
`ChatResponse.refusal_reason` (the generation path), not from the
typed recognition refusal. The teaching loop is supposed to consume
typed recognizer refusals as learning signals (per ADR-0143's
refusal-first design); today the signals are dropped.
- **Dependency:** light — requires extending the pipeline's recognition
branch to fold `_rec_outcome.refusal_reason` into the turn result.
- **Proposed home:** small ADR amendment to ADR-0144 or new tiny ADR
*"propagate recognition refusal_reason into CognitiveTurnResult"*.
Mechanical change; should not require L10 or storage decisions.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — independent, can land soon.
### W-012 — `InnerLoopExhaustion` not caught in `ChatRuntime.chat()`
- **Surfaced by:** L5 audit (PR #244).
- **Gap:** Inner-loop refusal exceptions (`InnerLoopExhaustion`,
ADR-0024) are raised during generation but **never caught in the
main `ChatRuntime.chat()` execution**. The plumbing to materialize
`RefusalReason` taxonomy into `ChatResponse.refusal_reason` exists
(W-011-adjacent), but the live run propagates as unhandled exception
instead of materialized refusal.
- **Cross-reference:** ADR-0142 implementation debt #3 lists this as
the blocker for full epistemic refusal tracking.
- **Dependency:** light — requires `try/except InnerLoopExhaustion` in
`ChatRuntime.chat()` with refusal materialization.
- **Proposed home:** small ADR or fix-PR directly. Likely titled
*"catch InnerLoopExhaustion and materialize refusal_reason in
ChatRuntime"*.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — independent, can land soon. Sibling to W-011
(both about refusal materialization at different boundaries).
### W-013 — `core/cognition/explain.py` dormant
- **Surfaced by:** L5 audit (PR #244).
- **Gap:** `core/cognition/explain.py` (124 lines) has 0 live
production callers outside its test file. It is re-exported in
`core/cognition/__init__.py` but unused.
- **Dependency:** operator decision — wire to live REPL / CLI
proposal commands, or accept that it's offline-only audit tooling
and either delete or relocate to `evals/` / `scripts/`.
- **Resolution paths:**
- **(a)** Wire into `core chat` for "explain this turn" interactive
command. Live integration.
- **(b)** Move to `evals/` if intended as offline audit tool.
- **(c)** Delete if neither (a) nor (b) is desired per
[[feedback-cleanup-as-you-find]] — the audit's "unambiguously
dead" bar is not met here because the module is well-formed and
test-covered, just unwired. Operator call.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — operator decision required.
### W-014 — `core/cognition/provenance.py` partially live (evals-only)
- **Surfaced by:** L5 audit (PR #244).
- **Gap:** `core/cognition/provenance.py` (101 lines) is consumed only
by `evals/provenance/runner.py` and tests. No live runtime caller.
- **Dependency:** independent. Same operator decision as W-013 (wire,
relocate, or accept as evals-only).
- **Resolution paths:**
- **(a)** Wire into live turn result for per-turn provenance
surfacing.
- **(b)** Relocate to `evals/` and accept as offline-only.
- **(c)** Leave as-is and document explicitly as evals-only.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — lighter than W-013 because there IS a live
consumer (evals); the question is whether it should be promoted to
runtime use.
### W-015 — `session/context.py` post-generation unitize undocumented (INVESTIGATED → fix in flight)
**Investigation closed (PR #252).** Sonnet's investigation produced
verdict **(c) — upstream construction violation**, with mechanical
evidence: bimodal distribution across 4,138 samples (either
`vc < 1e-6` for near-identity slerp, or `vc >> 1e-3` with median 0.19
and max 38.58; nothing in `[1e-6, 1e-5)`). The `unitize_versor` at
`session/context.py:236` was repairing off-manifold state produced
by `_slerp_toward` (lines 38-64). Slerp interpolates on **S³¹**
(the 32D unit sphere) but the versor manifold (Spin group embedded
in Cl(4,1)) is a **proper subset** of S³¹ — the geodesic doesn't
stay on it.
**Recommended fix (in flight via Sonnet):** replace `_slerp_toward`
with proper rotor geodesic interpolation via the Lie group
exponential map — same approach `rotor_power` already uses at
`generate/stream.py:220`. That stays on the versor manifold by
construction; `unitize_versor` in `_anchor_pull` becomes unnecessary
and can be removed.
**Original ratchet entry (preserved for history):**
- **Surfaced by:** L6 audit (PR #246), answering L1 audit's forward
note (PR #237).
- **Gap:** `session/context.py:207-246` performs final-turn hemisphere
correction and anchor pull with `unitize_versor()`. The site is
test-covered, but no ADR documents it as an allowed normalization
boundary. Per CLAUDE.md normalization rules, the only sanctioned
unitize sites are `ingest/gate.py`, `language_packs/compiler.py`,
and `algebra/versor.py`. The `session/context.py` site does not
appear in that list — it is either an undocumented allowed boundary
or a discipline violation.
- **Dependency:** none — purely a documentation/discipline question.
- **Resolution paths:**
- **(a)** Write a small ADR amendment or new ADR sanctioning
`session/context.py:207-246` as an allowed normalization boundary
(the "final-turn anchor pull" boundary), with rationale.
- **(b)** If the site is NOT a sanctioned boundary, refactor to
remove the unitize call and surface any resulting closure
failures rather than silently repairing them. Per CLAUDE.md:
*"Do not add drift repair... whose only purpose is to repair
another function."*
- **(c)** Investigate whether the unitize is masking an upstream
construction violation. If so, fix upstream and remove the
site.
- **Recommended:** start with (c) — investigate root cause. (a) is the
fallback if the unitize turns out to be a legitimate boundary.
(b) is the fallback if it's pure drift repair.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — discipline question; small ADR or small
refactor depending on investigation outcome.
### W-016 — Contemplation operates without vault probe
- **Surfaced by:** L8 audit (PR #250).
- **Gap:** `teaching.contemplation.contemplate` accepts an
`injectable vault_probe` parameter, and tests prove coherent vault
evidence can contribute to discovery candidate enrichment. But
`ChatRuntime._emit_discovery_candidates` calls `contemplate(c)`
with **no probe**. Inline contemplation therefore operates on pack
+ reviewed corpus only, ignoring the session vault — exactly the
Tier 1 evidence the four-tier model intends contemplation to
consume.
- **Dependency:** light — wire a vault probe at the
`ChatRuntime._emit_discovery_candidates` call site.
- **Proposed home:** small fix-PR. May benefit from a brief ADR note
documenting the probe contract.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — independent, can land soon.
### W-017 — Automated T1/T2 → T3 promotion absent
- **Surfaced by:** L8 audit (PR #250); ADR-0055's own "what is
missing" section names this gap explicitly.
- **Gap:** The four-tier memory model (ADR-0055) specifies discovery
evidence from T1 (session vault) and T2 (turn-event audit) should
feed into proposed promotions to T3 (reviewed teaching corpus).
Today, discovery candidates ARE emitted (W-016 caveat aside) and
ARE written to disk via `DiscoveryMonthlyFileSink`, but no
automated path turns them into proposals. Promotion to T3 still
requires L7's synchronous operator `core teaching propose` command.
- **Dependency:** chained — depends on W-009 (HITL async queue) to
give automated promotion a place to deposit candidates without
blocking the engine, AND on W-016 (vault probe wired so candidates
carry T1 evidence).
- **Proposed home:** new ADR — *"automated T1/T2 → T3 promotion
pipeline"*. Sized after W-009 and W-016 commit.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — chained: W-009 + W-016 → W-017.
### W-018 — ADR-0080 contemplation not autonomous
- **Surfaced by:** L8 audit (PR #250).
- **Gap:** ADR-0080 contemplation runs as a CLI operator command
(`core contemplation`) over explicit report files, not as an
autonomous runtime loop. Live plan contemplation exists in
`ChatRuntime` but is opt-in via
`RuntimeConfig.discourse_contemplation=True` (default off).
"Autonomous" contemplation that runs without operator invocation
doesn't exist.
- **Dependency:** chained — autonomous contemplation needs a runtime
shape to live in (W-008 — L10 runtime model), and an event source
(likely tied to W-017 promotion triggers).
- **Proposed home:** ADR amendment to ADR-0080 or new ADR — *"runtime-
resident autonomous contemplation"*. Sized after W-008 commits.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — chained: W-008 → W-018.
### W-019 — `from_miner.py` / `from_curriculum.py` test-live only
- **Surfaced by:** L8 audit (PR #250).
- **Gap:** `teaching/from_miner.py` (370 lines) and
`teaching/from_curriculum.py` (275 lines) correctly build
source-stamped proposals per ADR-0094 / ADR-0095 / ADR-0104, but
no CLI command or live runtime path invokes them. Test-live
only — the miner and curriculum candidate-conversion paths exist
but produce nothing in production.
- **Dependency:** operator decision — wire to a CLI command (small),
invoke from a runtime path (medium, depends on W-008 / W-017), or
document as offline-only library code for evals.
- **Resolution paths:**
- **(a)** Wire CLI: `core teaching propose --from-miner <dir>` and
`--from-curriculum <dir>`. Small, no architectural commitment.
- **(b)** Wire into W-017's automated promotion pipeline when that
lands.
- **(c)** Leave as test-live library and document explicitly.
- **Recommended:** (a) first as the smallest reachability fix; (b)
follows naturally if W-017 materializes.
- **Status:** ⏳ OPEN — operator decision required.
---
## Dependency graph (Mermaid-style, ASCII)
```
W-001 ✅ ──── (independent, FIXED)
W-002 ✅ ──── (independent, FIXED)
W-004 ✅ ──── (independent, FIXED — PR #251) ────→ W-005 ⏳ (now unlocked)
W-006 ⏳ ──── (operator decision) ────────────────────────┘ (may merge / supersede)
W-011 ⏳ ──── (independent, mechanical)
W-012 ⏳ ──── (independent, mechanical) — sibling of W-011
W-010 ⏳ ──── (operator decision: intentional or wire L3 vocab)
W-013 ⏳ ──── (operator decision: wire, relocate, or delete)
W-014 ⏳ ──── (operator decision: lighter than W-013)
W-015 ⏳ ──── INVESTIGATED (verdict c, PR #252); fix in flight via Sonnet
W-016 ⏳ ──── (independent, mechanical: wire vault probe)
W-019 ⏳ ──── (operator decision: CLI, runtime, or library-only)
W-008 (L10 ADR) ⏳
├──→ W-003 (VaultPromotionPolicy wiring) ⏳
│ └──→ recognizer-storage ADR
│ └──→ W-007 (recognizer integration) ⏳
├──→ W-009 (HITL async queue) ⏳
│ ├──→ drop-off sibling ADR
│ └──→ W-017 (automated T1/T2→T3 promotion) ⏳
│ ↑
│ ├── W-016 (vault probe)
│ └── W-019 (miner/curriculum wiring) — if path (b) chosen
└──→ W-018 (autonomous contemplation) ⏳
```
---
## Suggested next ADRs (sequence)
In dependency order, given current findings. **Quick wins first
(mechanical, independent, small diffs), then operator decisions, then
the bigger L10 unit.**
### Quick wins — independent, mechanical, small diffs
1. **W-015 fix — Replace `_slerp_toward` with rotor geodesic** (in
flight via Sonnet). Removes the `_anchor_pull` unitize, closes a
real construction violation. Smallest meaningful fix.
2. **W-011 — Propagate recognition `refusal_reason` into
`CognitiveTurnResult`.** Small pipeline change. Closes recognition
audit-trail gap.
3. **W-012 — Catch `InnerLoopExhaustion` in `ChatRuntime.chat()`.**
Sibling of W-011 — both about refusal materialization. Closes
ADR-0142 implementation debt #3.
4. **W-016 — Wire vault probe into
`ChatRuntime._emit_discovery_candidates`.** New from L8. Light
wire-up.
### Operator-decision items — small either way, just need a call
5. **W-006 — Pack readback: wire or delete.** Per
[[feedback-cleanup-as-you-find]], operator decides.
6. **W-013 / W-014 — `explain.py` / `provenance.py`: wire, relocate,
or delete.** Same shape as W-006.
7. **W-010 — L4 recognition vocabulary: token-level intentional, or
wire L3 vocab.** Affects whether recognition pulls in
pack-resident domain types.
8. **W-019 — `from_miner.py` / `from_curriculum.py`: CLI, runtime,
or library-only.** Smallest fix is CLI wiring (path a).
### Then user-observable second-order changes (W-004 now unlocks W-005)
9. **W-005 — Energy-modulated surface readback.** Now meaningful
since W-004 closed (vault recall declares E2). Closes E0/E2
readback rot.
### Bigger units (gated on or co-evolving with L10)
10. **W-008 — Runtime model ADR (or cluster).** Largest unit. Gates
W-003, W-007, W-009, W-017, W-018. Scope landed (#236); spike +
ADR next.
11. **W-003 — `VaultPromotionPolicy` wiring.** Small ADR once W-008
commits to process shape.
12. **Recognizer-storage ADR** — answers `recognizer-storage-scope.md`
against W-008's process shape and W-003's wired promotion.
13. **W-007 — `DerivedRecognizer` integration into turn loop.** Small
once the storage ADR commits.
14. **W-009 — HITL async queue.** Concurrent with or after W-008.
15. **W-017 — Automated T1/T2 → T3 promotion.** After W-009 + W-016.
16. **W-018 — Autonomous contemplation.** After W-008.
This order is a suggestion. The operator decides; the ratchet records.
**Why the v4 reorder:** v3 led with W-004 (vault re-thaw); that
shipped (PR #251), so v4 leads with W-015 fix (in flight) as the next
smallest meaningful closure. The L8 audit added W-016 to the quick-
wins lane and W-017/W-018 to the L10-gated cluster, reflecting that
automated memory promotion and autonomous contemplation both depend
on the runtime model decision.
---
## Items deliberately deferred / not in scope
- **EngineIdentity (DNA-analog hash).** Shelved candidate per
[[project-engine-identity-candidate]]. Trigger to un-shelve: L10
runtime-model ADR commits to cross-reboot identity verification as
a sub-question 3 requirement.
- **Audit complete.** All 9/9 layers audited. L8 added W-016/W-017/
W-018/W-019; L9 confirmed W-011 and W-012 from the verdict-surface
side without adding new entries (the refusal-reason matrix is a
consolidation of prior findings, not new debt). Future ratchet
revisions are wiring-progress driven, not audit-driven.
- **Drop-off sibling ADR for recognizers.** Named in recognizer-
storage-scope v2; depends on W-008 + recognizer-storage ADR + W-009.
Not added to the ratchet as a standalone entry yet because it's a
derived consequence of items already listed.
---
## How the ratchet evolves
Per the audit-scope: "the ratchet is revisable as the registry changes.
Each completed wiring updates the ratchet and (likely) reveals new
wiring debt in layers above."
Revision discipline:
- **New audit finding ⇒ new W-NNN entry.** Append, don't renumber.
- **Wiring completed ⇒ mark ✅ in-place + retain entry.** History is
the value; renumbering destroys it.
- **Dependency learned later ⇒ amend in-place + date the amendment.**
- **Operator decision ⇒ amend "proposed home" or "resolution path"
with citation.**
This file should grow over the substrate-liveness program. When the
ratchet shows all entries closed, **live mode is reached**.
---
## Cross-references
- [substrate-liveness-audit-scope](../decisions/substrate-liveness-audit-scope.md) — defines the audit shape
- [substrate-liveness-registry](./substrate-liveness-registry.md) — per-layer evidence
- [L10-runtime-model-scope](../decisions/L10-runtime-model-scope.md) — gates W-003, W-007, W-009
- [recognizer-storage-scope](../decisions/recognizer-storage-scope.md) — gates W-007
- [teaching-derived-recognition-scope](../decisions/teaching-derived-recognition-scope.md) — parent of recognition arc
- [project-engine-identity-candidate](../../../.claude/projects/-Users-kaizenpro-Projects-core/memory/project-engine-identity-candidate.md) — shelved candidate
- [feedback-adr-cross-reference-discipline](../../../.claude/projects/-Users-kaizenpro-Projects-core/memory/feedback-adr-cross-reference-discipline.md) — discipline applied
- [feedback-cleanup-as-you-find](../../../.claude/projects/-Users-kaizenpro-Projects-core/memory/feedback-cleanup-as-you-find.md) — applies to W-006 if delete-path is chosen