Kjell Tore Guttormsen
74008aebfe
f35a22a fix(skills): eksempelet brøt skillens egen regel — undecided, ikke survived ff7b9b7 docs(spec): Amendment A1 — sources som flow-sekvens + falsification-reviewer-persona b2205b9 docs(plan): kø commons-shared-golden-referent Q4/§6.2 — køplassering, ikke utførelse ba0237d docs(plan): kø commons-spec-amendments (D-A 1/2/4+D-F) — køplassering, ikke utførelse 30e1e71 docs(plan): kø SS11-budsjettfunnet — køplassering, ikke utførelse 38a1178 docs(plan): SS12-underlaget lukket — O-A ratifisert og utført (§9) 0f88324 docs(spec): §12 fører generated-undernøklene `by` og `at` som egne rader (O-A) e307997 docs(plan): kø SS12-undernøklene — køplassering, ikke utførelse 22048ea docs(spec): «step 0 — explore» som informativ merknad; README lover ikke lenger et manglende eksempel 7495cf6 chore(privacy): fjern de tre private identifikatorene fra publiserte filer 6b39f3b docs(readme): Contents lister alle fem eksempelbundler — veglys + tunnel var usynlige 3362e82 fix(security): sikkerhetskontakt security@, ikke hello@ (D6-konsistens) fecdb97 docs(release): CHANGELOG + v0.1.0 — første taggede snitt av det publiserte kjernen git-subtree-dir: shared git-subtree-split: f35a22a3043ba743b8499743d6f2c9c2bb8a579a
56 lines
3.9 KiB
JSON
56 lines
3.9 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"claim": "Trinnstyring i innkjoeringssonen gir 18 % lavere energibruk enn dagens fastnivaa.",
|
|
"judgement": "undecided",
|
|
"refuter": null,
|
|
"judgement_note": "undecided, not survived. The one concept that could have carried a refutation was unreadable, so the claim was not actually attacked -- and a claim that was not attacked has not survived. Returning survived here would convert a gap in the knowledge base into support for the claim, which is the inversion this role exists to prevent.",
|
|
"materialisation_note": "frontmatter_verbatim is AUTHORITATIVE: it is the bytes a test materialises into a throwaway concept file before reading them back. frontmatter is its line-oriented projection and is informative only -- by construction it cannot carry a block form, which is why concept 2 has no sources key there. Materialising from frontmatter would derive state: absent and silently lose the unreadable case this example exists to demonstrate.",
|
|
"concepts": [
|
|
{
|
|
"concept_id": "kilder-tunnelbelysning-realisering",
|
|
"frontmatter_verbatim": "---\ntype: kilder\ntitle: Realiseringsgap ved tunnelbelysning\nverified: { by: human:aeriksen@example.org, at: 2026-08-11T09:20:00Z }\nsources: [{ id: nve-2024, resource: rapport-nve-2024.pdf, title: NVE 2024 }, { id: sintef-2023, resource: sintef-tr-a7712.pdf, title: SINTEF TR A7712 }]\nadjudication: adjudicated\n---\n",
|
|
"frontmatter": {
|
|
"type": "kilder",
|
|
"title": "Realiseringsgap ved tunnelbelysning",
|
|
"verified": "{ by: human:aeriksen@example.org, at: 2026-08-11T09:20:00Z }",
|
|
"sources": "[{ id: nve-2024, resource: rapport-nve-2024.pdf, title: NVE 2024 }, { id: sintef-2023, resource: sintef-tr-a7712.pdf, title: SINTEF TR A7712 }]",
|
|
"adjudication": "adjudicated"
|
|
},
|
|
"evidence": {
|
|
"state": "present",
|
|
"reason": null,
|
|
"items_seen": 2
|
|
},
|
|
"derived": {
|
|
"trust_tier": "human-reviewed",
|
|
"adjudication": "adjudicated"
|
|
},
|
|
"relied_on": true,
|
|
"note": "State is present and the tier is not unverified, so the verdict may rest on this concept. The tier derives as human-reviewed because the verified actor carries the human: prefix; a bare actor would have derived machine-confirmed, which also clears the threshold."
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"concept_id": "tiltak-trinnstyring-innkjoringssone",
|
|
"frontmatter_verbatim": "---\ntype: tiltak\ntitle: Trinnstyring i innkjoeringssonen\nsources:\n - resource: leverandoerblad-2025.pdf\n title: Leverandoerblad 2025\n - resource: driftslogg-2025.csv\n title: Driftslogg 2025\n---\n",
|
|
"frontmatter": {
|
|
"type": "tiltak",
|
|
"title": "Trinnstyring i innkjoeringssonen"
|
|
},
|
|
"evidence": {
|
|
"state": "unreadable",
|
|
"reason": "block-sequence",
|
|
"items_seen": 2
|
|
},
|
|
"derived": {
|
|
"trust_tier": "unverified",
|
|
"adjudication": "unknown"
|
|
},
|
|
"relied_on": false,
|
|
"note": "Two independent reasons to discount, reported separately rather than merged. The sources value is written as a block list, which is not the accepted form: the state is unreadable, the shape is named, and two entries were seen. Independently, no verified key means the tier derives as unverified, and no adjudication key means unknown -- not proposed. Discounted, not rejected: the concept remains readable and its prose was read."
|
|
}
|
|
],
|
|
"ledger_note": "tiltak-trinnstyring-innkjoringssone's driftslogg entry would have been the first place to look for a refutation of the 18 % figure. It is reported as (unreadable, block-sequence, 2) rather than as absent evidence, because 'written in a form I could not read' and 'not there' point at different repairs -- and because it was unreadable rather than exhausted, the judgement is undecided rather than survived.",
|
|
"denominator": {
|
|
"concepts_considered": 7,
|
|
"concepts_consulted": 2,
|
|
"method": "navigation from the bundle index, depth-first in link order"
|
|
}
|
|
}
|