Kjell Tore Guttormsen
f21007c858
Session 102's criterion ((a) built on the right fasit concept OR refused anchored, (b') names it,
(c) zero hallucinations) was adjudicated BY HAND. Measured 14.09: nothing in the tree read
contexts/<set>/fasit.json against an outbox at all, so "provable against the base" had no
repeatable form. portfolio_optimiser.stress reads ONLY artefacts that already exist -- the
per-approach proposal/outcome pair and {run_id}-debate.json -- so no run gains a field.
MEASURED BEFORE BUILDING: the order defines grounded as "OPENED or CITED", but on the S2c path
run_project stamps citations = bundle_citations(bundle), one per context file. On n100-2023 that
is 446 citations over 446 concepts, and 6 of 6 fasit paths are already "cited" before a single
model call. Honouring it literally would be the repo's own vacuous-gate class inside the gate
built to catch it, so a citation grounds an approach only under a NARROWED list (a declared
pre-pass cut); both halves are reported either way. (b') was checked for the same vacuity and is
clean -- snippets are bodies, ref/title live in frontmatter (0 of 446 n100 bodies carry
"Krav 4.1.2-1") -- so the order's definition stands.
A2: unanswerable questions had no runnable form (po is not a lookup tool), so they become a FOURTH
commissioned approach per set whose cost line the base carries no ground for, and fasit.json
carries must_refuse INSTEAD of unanswerable -- one form, never two copies of one fact. Rule U is
untouched and its known-positive is still red.
Load-bearing MEASURED (20 arms), eleven mutations all red on their own arm, green control 1663/5
(from 1643/5, superset, 0 removed), golden demo-transcript.stdout BYTE-UNCHANGED
(shasum -a 1 of the CONTENT = ea8c534773acdbe41ae68f2c55724d69aaf8be4f).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
46 lines
1.8 KiB
JSON
46 lines
1.8 KiB
JSON
{
|
|
"objective": "Kutt kostnad i dekkefornyelsen på fv. 412 (6,3 km, ÅDT 3 400) uten å bryte et eneste krav i N200.",
|
|
"success_criteria": "Minst én tilnærming validerer mot N200, og hver validerte tilnærming peker på de kravene i N200 som faktisk binder materialvalget.",
|
|
"approaches": [
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "a1-resirkulert-asfalt",
|
|
"label": "Økt andel resirkulert asfalt i bærelaget",
|
|
"description": "Beskrivelsen forutsetter nytt bituminøst bærelag. Vi vil vite hva N200 tillater av resirkulert asfalt.",
|
|
"affected_codes": [
|
|
"DEKKE-ASF-01"
|
|
],
|
|
"claimed_saving_nok": 2750000.0,
|
|
"bundle_id": "vegnormal-n200-2024"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "a2-barelag-gjenbruk",
|
|
"label": "Gjenbruk av eksisterende bærelag i stedet for utskifting",
|
|
"description": "Eksisterende bærelag er antatt utskiftet i sin helhet. Spørsmålet er hvilke krav N200 stiller til bærelag før gjenbruk kan vurderes.",
|
|
"affected_codes": [
|
|
"DEKKE-BAER-01"
|
|
],
|
|
"claimed_saving_nok": 1450000.0,
|
|
"bundle_id": "vegnormal-n200-2024"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "a3-frostsikring-tykkelse",
|
|
"label": "Tynnere frostsikringslag av ubundne materialer",
|
|
"description": "Frostsikringen er prosjektert med full tykkelse over hele strekningen. Vi vil vite hva N200 krever.",
|
|
"affected_codes": [
|
|
"DEKKE-FROST-01"
|
|
],
|
|
"claimed_saving_nok": 1900000.0,
|
|
"bundle_id": "vegnormal-n200-2024"
|
|
},
|
|
{
|
|
"id": "a4-tonnpris-asfalt",
|
|
"label": "Lavere tonnpris pa resirkulert asfalt",
|
|
"description": "Vi vil kutte ved a legge en lavere tonnpris for resirkulert asfalt til grunn.",
|
|
"affected_codes": [
|
|
"DEKKE-ASF-ENHET"
|
|
],
|
|
"claimed_saving_nok": 800000.0,
|
|
"bundle_id": "vegnormal-n200-2024"
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|