docs(ms-ai-architect): R11 §9.8 rettelse — falskt radtall; 'forste' verifisert framfor antatt [skip-docs]

To rettelser til §9.8 som skrevet i 527fb03, begge fanget av review.

1. RADTALLET VAR FEIL. §9.8 sa fem av seks rader umalte under
compliance-stempelet. idx 26s lokator 2 skrev om Risk assessment-raden til
'fairness insights', som samme live-enumerasjon lister som kanonisk segment —
sa TO rader er kildemalte og FIRE er ikke.

Feilen er lardomsbarende: koens resolution for idx-26b sier det korrekt, 'only
one was measured against the source THIS SESSION'. §9.8 gjenfortalte den uten
scoping-leddet og gjorde en sann kvalifisert pastand om til et falskt tall.
Det er §9.7-defektklassen reprodusert ett avsnitt etter at den ble skrevet opp.
Konklusjonen star: fire umalte rader forbyr a styrke stempelet like godt som
fem ville gjort.

2. 'FORSTE' VAR ANTATT, ER NA VERIFISERT. Pastanden om at idx-26c er forste
resolved entry med levende anker er sjekket mot alle fire resolved entries:
idx 26 to ankere driftet, idx-26b driftet, og idx-17 barer TOM ankerliste — den
kunne verken matche eller drifte og har aldri utovd unntaket. Pastanden holder,
men star na pa maling framfor pa antakelse.

docs/r11-pilot-results.md

@@ -961,15 +961,31 @@ its scope was checked rather than assumed, and it now vouches for a complete
 seven-member enumeration re-verified against the live source on the date it already
 carries. The `Verified (Baseline + MCP-inferred)` stamp under the compliance table is
 **deliberately not upgraded**, even though the row beneath it was just measured against
-first-party source: that stamp covers six rows and five of them were not measured, so
-strengthening it would extend a verification claim over unmeasured content. §9.7 taught
+first-party source: that stamp covers six rows and **four** of them are still unmeasured,
+so strengthening it would extend a verification claim over unmeasured content. §9.7 taught
 that renewing a marker commits you to everything it covers; the same rule read forward
 says a marker may not be strengthened by a repair narrower than its scope.
 
+**Correction to this section as first written (`527fb03`), caught on review.** The
+sentence above said five of the six rows were unmeasured. That is wrong: idx 26's
+locator 2 rewrote the Risk assessment row to *fairness insights*, which the same live
+enumeration lists as a canonical segment, so **two** rows are source-measured and four
+are not. The error is instructive, because the queue `resolution` for idx-26b states it
+correctly — "only one was measured against the source **this session**" — and §9.8
+restated it with the scoping clause dropped, turning a true scoped claim into a false
+count. **That is the §9.7 defect class reproduced one paragraph after writing it up:**
+a claim that was true inside its qualifier became false when the qualifier was left
+behind. The conclusion the count supports is unaffected — four unmeasured rows forbid
+strengthening the stamp exactly as five would.
+
 **idx-26c's anchor still matches verbatim, and that is the first real exercise of the
 exemption.** Item 5 was untouched, so `5. **Data quality**: …` still occurs in the
 file. idx-26b's anchor did stop matching. Both validate, because `resolution` is what
-the gate demands of a resolved entry.
+the gate demands of a resolved entry. "First" was checked rather than assumed against
+all four resolved entries: idx 26's two anchors both drifted, idx-26b's drifted, and
+idx-17 carries an **empty** anchor array, so it could neither match nor drift and never
+exercised the exemption. idx-26c is the first entry to close with a live anchor
+standing.
 
 **The sweep opened a fourth entry — idx-26d — but not in the same way §9.7 did.**
 idx-26c was *created* by its repair: dating a stamp converted a latent gap into an