Commit graph

5 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
1e11dcb96c feat(simulation): the demo now RUNS the Step-7 file inbox it narrates (P1/S1.a)
The Step-7 trace line said "lang fil-løkke" while the verdict arrived as a
function argument (`verdict_input`) — the short, in-run capture. The long loop
was tested but never exercised by the thing on stage.

An expert now drops a real verdict FILE (`write_verdict`) into an inbox between
the runs, and Run B is given `verdict_dir=`, so `run_project` merges it into the
store before the Step-1 fold.

Not done as the plan point was worded, and the difference is load-bearing:
routing the PERSONA verdict through the inbox would have put ONE marker on two
paths — Step 7 (inbox) and Step 8 (promotion) both end in Run B's prompt, so
either could carry it alone and `test_simulation_loadbearing.py`'s promotion
assertion would have stayed green with promotion detached. A second verdict with
its own marker keeps both seams independently red-able; `simulate_learning_loop`
raises when the two markers are equal. The inbox sits beside the bundle copy,
never inside it, and the id is an explicit sentinel (a minted id would collide
with the promoted verdict's, and `VerdictStore.add` is first-write-wins).

766 -> 769 passed (773 collected). Criterion 6 re-measured: stdout byte-identical
across two runs; stderr unchanged at 6 lines. Mutations measured against the full
suite, four red + a green control: detach `verdict_dir=` · point Run B at an empty
folder while the file is still written · marker set to `realization_rate: 0.82`
(measured present in the verdict seed) · marker set to `energy performance gap`
(measured present in a navigated concept file) · benign rename of the inbox dir.

Honesty limit found while measuring: the last two mutations fell on the causality
assertion, not the Run A control — generation prompts carry the debate output, not
the bundle context. The pair holds, but each assert defends a different property.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FVYDeJ9evZicgU5r3roZVW
2026-08-09 13:13:21 +02:00
d0571ca408 docs(plan): six objections measured, all taken in — the anchoring risk moves to the weekend
I1: Funn 1 was measured one directory wide; the repo ships a working S4.0
baseline fixture and run.py:516 reads it. The anchored dry-run + the 10%%
deviation test move from Tuesday to the weekend (P4 pt 0); Tuesday becomes a
re-measurement with an explicit abort path (I4: pre-pull hash, reset rule,
18:00 NO-GO). I2: stderr damping decided YES, in the weekend BEFORE pinning —
measured today stderr is six lines, one deliberately non-deterministic. I3:
[project.scripts] moves off freeze day to before the fresh-clone measurement.
I5: a demo runbook post (P4.5) at the freeze. I6: every §4 claim re-measured
today on HEAD bb3df79; the 08-09 datings were commits from 2026-08-06.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UDHSsyMuBASJcRapddciHL
2026-08-07 16:55:30 +02:00
f49a4d263b docs(plan): work starts Friday with full quota — front-load everything that needs no new content
Operator directive: full week available, weekend included, new quota,
high priority. The calendar now starts Friday with P1, pulls the whole
P4 advance (fresh-clone criterion, golden transcript, stderr muting,
both honesty sentences) into the weekend against the micro reserve, and
makes Monday dress rehearsal #0 — the NO-GO outcome is fully verified
BEFORE Tuesday's GO gate, leaving Tuesday/Wednesday thin: pull+measure,
re-measure, freeze, release cut, tag.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019xhQpH4oQBaf8dxCkXuB8Z
2026-08-07 08:20:06 +02:00
33f0a6857d docs(plan): §0 splits the week into two tracks — complete v1 by Thursday, and the demo
Operator decision 2026-08-09. Track 1 (complete v1, incl. other repos):
S1.a = P1 step-7 inbox, S1.b = P2 content gate, S1.c = release cut
(1.0.0 synced in four places, CHANGELOG, [project.scripts] moved in from
P9, tag only AFTER a green dress rehearsal). Other-repo accounting is
measured: commons already ordered with the Tuesday deadline and a
reserve, okf/guard/po-claude need nothing — no new coord message. Each
post carries a named degradation so v1 stays honestly complete at every
level. Track 2 (convincing demo): P3 + P4 + rehearsal + one spoken
mandate sentence, optional stderr-noise muting before the freeze. The
O4-vs-tag conflict is flagged for the operator, not decided.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019xhQpH4oQBaf8dxCkXuB8Z
2026-08-06 23:30:01 +02:00
0eb0f3d72b docs(plan): the review's findings as a ranked plan the NESTE block walks, one point per session
Fable-review 2026-08-09 made durable: P1-P10 in plain language with the
commands behind every number (evidence table §4). Pre-demo: step-7 inbox
wired into the walkthrough (P1), Spor B sharpening (P2), the stage-0
first-contact check on Tuesday's GO (P3), fresh-clone/stderr/golden
criteria plus two honesty sentences on Wednesday (P4). Post-demo: CLI
portfolio cap (P6), one consolidated commons amendment (P7), method
skill [Voyage] (P8), and an explicit NULL for orchestration swaps (P10).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_019xhQpH4oQBaf8dxCkXuB8Z
2026-08-06 23:13:23 +02:00