fix(ms-ai-architect): G7 idx-26d + idx-27 lukket — scorecard-lista kanonisert, modalitet rettet, FAQ-barnet sitert

idx-26d: alle fem scorecard-navn omdøpt til kildens segmentnavn; beskrivelsene
på punkt 1 (Model Card-innhold) og 3 (dashboard-vokabular) skrevet om. Punkt
2/4/5 bevisst urørt — deres ubelagte spesifisitet er egen klasse (idx-26f).

idx-27: åpent spørsmål #8 besvart NEI (hub-barn teller ikke som kilden).
Løst ved å SITERE barnet i stedet: faqs-generative-orchestration lagt til.
Chat interface-raden bærer nå kildens faktiske standardmelding; Plugin
actions FLYTTET ut av Built-in-tabellen fordi den er maker-konfigurerbar —
å svekke overskriften eller legge til en modalitets-kolonne ville laget nye
ubekreftede påstander om to umålte rader.

idx-26c: falsk locator («linje 129») rettet i køa; stempelet er linje 131.

Tre nye entries: idx-27b, idx-26e (funnet av kryss-fil-grep FØR editen),
idx-26f. Kø: 6 åpne / 6 resolved. Suite 1047/1047.

[skip-docs]

docs/r11-pilot-results.md

@@ -1001,6 +1001,88 @@ chosen, so the ratified scope was completeness alone and this is booked, not fol
 
 **Queue state: 5 open, 4 resolved.** Suite 1047/1047.
 
+### 9.9 idx-26d and idx-27 closed — and what an unmeasured neighbour costs an edit
+
+Run 2026-08-03, same day as §9.8, later pass. Both sources were re-fetched live
+before writing; neither §9.7 nor §9.8 was read as fact.
+
+**idx-26d closed by full canonicalisation, and the discriminator was not the one the
+entry offered.** The entry framed an either/or: rename all five members, or rewrite
+item 1 alone — item 1 being the only member whose drift produces a false attribution
+rather than a recognisable paraphrase. Item 1 is genuinely the worst member, so the
+narrow form is tempting. It is also the wrong form, for a reason the entry's own
+summary contains: idx-26d is **booked as the list mixing two naming dialects** after
+idx-26c added two source-named members. Rewriting item 1 alone removes a falsity and
+leaves the booked defect standing — it would resolve an entry whose stated defect
+survives the resolution. **A resolution has to close the defect the entry names, not
+the worst defect the entry mentions.** The two are not the same thing, and the entry
+text will not tell you which one you are looking at unless you re-read it against the
+resolution you are about to write.
+
+All five names were renamed to the source segments. Descriptions were rewritten for
+items 1 and 3 only: item 1 carried Model Card content (this file lists Model details /
+Intended use / Training data as Model Card sections at lines 71–76), and item 3
+carried "global/local explanations", RAI *dashboard* vocabulary standing inside a
+scorecard enumeration that this same file's callout says is not a dashboard listing.
+Source order was **not** imposed — §9.8 established the list carries no ordering claim.
+
+**The descriptions that were deliberately left wrong.** Items 2 and 5 carry specifics
+the source does not state: "(gender, ethnicity, age)" where the source says only "your
+desired sensitive groups", and "missing values, outlier analysis" where it says only
+that the segment "shows you characteristics of your data". Those were raised as
+**idx-26f** in the same pass and left untouched in the file. The option presented to
+the operator carried an illustrative sketch that *did* rewrite them; the option's own
+label did not. Applying the sketch would have silently resolved an entry raised the
+same session and left the queue incoherent — an entry pointing at text that no longer
+exists, with nobody having ratified its removal. **When a decision is presented as
+label plus illustration, the label is the ratified object.** The illustration is a
+reading aid and may be wider than what was decided.
+
+**idx-27 closed without ratifying the hub question.** Open question #8 — whether a hub
+page's linked children count as the cited source — was answered **no**. R11's strict
+reading stands. The entry closed anyway, by a move the question does not gate: the
+child page was **added to the file as a cited source**. Grounding on an uncited page
+is an expansion of "the source"; grounding on a page you then cite is not. This is
+worth naming as a general move — *an unratified scope question can sometimes be
+routed around by changing the artefact rather than the rule*, and routing around it
+leaves the rule unweakened for every other entry that will meet it.
+
+**The repair could not be made in place, and the reason is instructive.** The
+Plugin-actions row asserts a confirmation prompt as a **built-in** disclosure; the
+source makes it maker-configurable. The row sits in a four-row table under the heading
+**Built-in disclosures**, and two of those four rows have never been measured. Three
+repairs were available:
+
+- Fix the row's text in place → the heading still asserts the false modality.
+- Weaken the heading → silently restates the modality of the two unmeasured rows.
+- Add a modality column → asserts "built-in" about the unmeasured rows outright.
+
+The last two fix one unverified claim by minting two more. The row was **moved out**
+into a separate maker-configured block instead. **Unmeasured neighbours constrain the
+shape of a repair, not just its scope:** the cheapest true edit is the one that
+restates nothing you have not checked, and that is frequently *not* the smallest diff.
+This is the same neighbourhood discipline as §9.7/§9.8 read from the other side —
+there, the neighbourhood held defects to find; here, it held claims not to touch.
+
+**A false locator inside a tracked artefact, found by re-reading a resolution.**
+idx-26c's resolution located the **Confidence:** stamp at "line 129". Line 129 is the
+**Status:** line; the stamp is 131. The claim about the stamp was true, the locator
+was not, and it was committed. The queue contract forbids line numbers as anchors
+because `line ≠ real_line` in 9 of 17 R11 records — **that prohibition applies to
+prose inside an entry too, and nothing checks it.** Corrected in place, with the
+correction recorded rather than overwritten. STATE carried the same error.
+
+**Three entries opened, none swept in.** idx-27b (the same "Powered by AI"
+imprecision in Mønster 3's implementation list, outside idx-27's anchors), idx-26e (a
+parallel five-member scorecard list in `stakeholder-communication-ai-decisions.md`, in
+the dialect idx-26d just removed, under an *undated* Verified stamp, and additionally
+framed as "configurable elements" which the source does not enumerate), and idx-26f
+above. idx-26e was found by a **cross-file grep run before the edit** — the check that
+asks whether a rename here creates an inconsistency there. It did not, but it found a
+mirror the corpus was not known to contain.
+
+**Queue state: 6 open, 6 resolved.** Suite 1047/1047.
+
 ## Appendix A — the 15 admitted proposals, hand-verified
 
 Every proposal the classifier (§4 + context condition) admitted over the whole