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>
Kjell Tore Guttormsen
f21007c858