Closes gap #3 (maalbilde §5): the GroupChat checker critiqued into the void —
output_from=[proposer] surfaced only the proposer, so an explicit checker
rejection was ignored and the deterministic validator was the sole gate. Two
falsifiers now act on the same candidate: the validator gates the NUMBERS
(blocking, unchanged), the checker gates the REASONING (maalbilde §2/§6).
- workflow.py: output_from=agents surfaces both participants; the checker
instruction ends with a VERDICT: APPROVE / VERDICT: REJECT - <reason> line.
- run.py: _authored_texts() reads author_name through out.messages (MAF 1.9.0
puts it there, not on the AgentResponse); _debate_text() now selects the
PROPOSER-authored output (fixes a latent texts[-1] regression that would feed
the checker's verdict to generation at even round counts); _checker_verdict()
parses the gate decision. An explicit REJECT overrides an otherwise-validated
outcome to a checker-sourced Rejection. Opt-in-reject (fail-open on a missing
marker). RunResult gains checker_verdict; provenance.validator_decision is
stamped from the validator outcome BEFORE the override, so it never conflates
the two falsifiers (provenance honesty).
Load-bearing (maalbilde §7): tests/test_checker_gate_loadbearing.py is a PAIR —
an explicit checker REJECT on a VALIDATOR-VALID proposal yields a Rejection whose
reason carries the checker's reason while validator_decision stays "validated";
the causality control (checker APPROVE, same proposer) validates normally. Proven
RED on BOTH detach points (revert output_from, or drop the override).
Suite 134->136 passed, 4 skipped; mypy + ruff check clean. Pre-existing
ruff-format drift (backends/budget/verdicts/test_contracts) left untouched for a
surgical diff.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MHR8iKxJRxDiDfNw8HZmWE
Kjell Tore Guttormsen
4ec778c855