Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
37547fe292
refactor(examples): replace sector-specific example material with generic, fictitious examples
The context sets, the packaged knowledge bases and the example bundles are
replaced by one fictitious example set about IT operations in an invented
organisation: three context sets (serverrom-2027, driftsavtale-2027 and the
two-base drift-og-avtale-2027), two synthetic knowledge bases under
src/portfolio_optimiser/data/kunnskapsbaser and two example bundles under
src/portfolio_optimiser/data/bundles. Numbers, codes and structural values in
tests and fixtures are kept; names, ids and wording change. Dated measurement
documents that only recorded runs on the replaced material are deleted.

Gate figures measured on the new set are not comparable with earlier ones.
The exclusion gate from the previous commit is green: 0 tracked files hit
outside the shared/ subtree.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-23 15:04:21 +02:00
938a1ca30e feat(row6): a proposal whose approach declared no requirement is unsupported
Stress round 6 validated three falsification arms, and every validated
approach rested only on run-level declarations nobody can attribute to one
approach. declare_requirement now takes a required approach_id (a mandate
id or own-proposal; an unknown id is refused naming the valid ones), and a
ValidatedProposal whose approach has neither a mandate requirement nor a
declaration under its own id becomes validator.Unsupported - a Rejection
subclass carrying the validator's own ruling, reported as `unsupported` in
coverage, the outcome artefact, the settlement and the judge, and never
counted or summed. The rule is active whenever the debate held the
declaration tool, the micro base included; the road and pre-pass paths are
untouched. Declaration quality is not judged, so the rule can be satisfied
by declaring any document the run read.

The v1 gate's row 6 probes pass; its artefact half reads IKKE MÅLT because
stress round 6 predates approach-addressed declarations, and IKKE MÅLT is
never green - it fails the exit code.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-17 16:40:54 +02:00
9072359606 feat(p22): declare_requirement answers with a COMPARISON, not a confirmation
P19 DEL A made a direction name the requirement that binds it; P20/A1 made the reply carry the
DOCUMENT's own title and number instead of echoing the caller's arguments. Re-measured at the head
of this session against the six round-5 debate traces: requirement_hit is 0 of 20 approach rows and
0 of 12 declarations -- the third round in a row at zero. P21/C1 made the runs LOOK first and it
worked on its own terms (distinct documents before a declaration went 1,1,1,2,5,13 -> 3,3,5,7,11,12)
and the hit did not move. The runs were made to read MORE, not righter.

The reply now compares: it names the directions the run was commissioned to pursue and says which
of their words appear in the declared document's own title and number, or that none do.

A REPORT, never a gate -- the declaration is recorded either way, because a requirement can bind a
measure without sharing a word with the name someone gave it, which is exactly how the alternative
rule the C1 measurement rejected failed one rung over. The words compared are the DOCUMENT's, never
`ref`: a comparison against the caller's own argument can only ever agree. Matching is generous in
both directions, and that failure direction is chosen -- a false "no overlap" pushes a model away
from a declaration that was right, a false "overlap" merely keeps the report quiet.

MEASURED BEFORE IT WAS BUILT, offline against the six traces as the order required (no paid calls
in DEL B): the rule speaks on 10 of 12 declarations and stays quiet on 2. A rule that spoke on 12
of 12, or on 0 of 12, could not tell the two classes apart.

`labels` defaults to empty, so every call site written before today is byte-identical and the three
keys are ABSENT rather than empty -- "there was nothing to compare against" and "we compared and
found nothing" are different facts. RUN-level, as the declaration itself is (P19 A4).

Also re-measured: the order cited requirement_hit as "0 of 12". The field is per APPROACH (0 of 20);
12 is the number of DECLARATIONS (7 distinct, 0 hits). Both zero, so the conclusion stands, but they
are two populations.

Load-bearing MEASURED (tests/test_requirement_comparison_loadbearing.py, 8 arms), eight mutations
all red against the WHOLE suite + green control 1881/5 (from 1873/5, superset, 0 removed) and
golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED (shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT =
ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f): B1 detach the run.py wiring (1 red, that arm alone) -
B2 always report an overlap (5) - B3 never report one (2) - B4 compare against the caller's ref
(1, that arm alone) - B5 make it a gate (5) - B6 emit the keys with no directions (2, one an OLDER
independent witness) - B7 exact token equality instead of substring (1) - B8 drop the minimum word
length (3).

Honesty limits, stated: no LIVE model has read the comparison yet (DEL D is the measurement); the
report cannot say a requirement IS right, only that it shares no word with the direction; and
finding 4 (`named` 1/20) is this same matter from the other side, so DEL D measures it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-16 00:04:47 +02:00