CB-WP-0038: variant selection, H1 implemented, and H1 measured
ground-game packages hypotheses as selectable rules variants — a catalog,
a rules_delta.yaml, and prose — and their note is explicit that CSV text
alone is not executable here. So the kernel gains a Variant in game state:
in the state, therefore in the hash, therefore in the recording, because a
scenario replayed under a different variant would diverge silently.
Baseline is bit-for-bit what it was, asserted across seat counts and
seeds. A variant system that perturbs the baseline invalidates every
measurement this repo has.
H1-A and H1-B implemented from rules_delta.yaml and mutation-proven on
their own defects: "unclaimed" misread as face-up-and-unsolved, and the
attacker's Stress read after the attack's effects. Their `unchanged:` list
is asserted rather than trusted — that list is their claim about their own
experiment.
Measured, and three of their four criteria fail. DARVO arm rate is still
0 under greedy; ATTACK selection does not rise and falls for the rank-75
policy; group success collapses from 165/190/200 to 0 at 3/4/6 seats.
The mechanism is not the assumed one: greedy answers the pressure by
regulating, Stress plateaus at 3, so it never reaches the gate at 4 or the
arm at 5 — H1-A acts as a solve-rate tax and H1-B is unreachable under
competent play.
A harness defect was caught before the claim: sweep discarded refused
games silently and never reported its count, so "nobody won" and "nothing
played" printed identically. Reporting H1 as unwinnable on that basis
would have been the ADR-0018 family aimed at another repo's design. All
200 games ran in every cell; the zeros are real.
Chaos d8 = 8 — the window's first override, redrew L against a structural
L, so it changed nothing. Window 3 recorded in ChaosRollHistory.
NOT REVIEWED: tier L owes a separate-agent adversarial review, and no H1
result may reach ground-game until it has run.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 00:50:08 +02:00
# CB-EV-0030 — H1 measured
CB-WP-0038. Tier L (structural L; **chaos d8 = 8 → override, redraw = L**
— the override changed nothing). **Declaration 10 of chaos window 3, and
the window's first 8.** Closed 2026-08-08.
> **This evidence has not had its tier-L adversarial review** (InnerLoop
> Step 2). **It may not go to `ground-game` until it has.** It is a
> measurement of another repo's design hypothesis, which is precisely the
> case the review exists for.
**Delivered:** variant selection in the kernel, H1-A and H1-B implemented
from `rules_delta.yaml` , ground-game's `unchanged:` list asserted rather
than trusted, and the ATTACK panel re-run for both rule sets.
---
## 1. The result, against their own criteria
`ground-game` 's success criteria (design note §3.2), answered one by one.
**Three of four fail.**
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
> **CORRECTED 2026-08-08 after adversarial review**
> ([`CB-REV-0001`](../reviews/CB-REV-0001-h1.md)). Criteria 1 and 2 were
> rendered as flat failures **on the strength of the greedy column
> alone**, while this pass's own harness printed 31–
> cell in the rank-75 and rank-95 columns. That is the selective-column
> move this project says it exists to prevent, committed in the file that
> says so. The verdicts below are restated per column.
CB-WP-0038: variant selection, H1 implemented, and H1 measured
ground-game packages hypotheses as selectable rules variants — a catalog,
a rules_delta.yaml, and prose — and their note is explicit that CSV text
alone is not executable here. So the kernel gains a Variant in game state:
in the state, therefore in the hash, therefore in the recording, because a
scenario replayed under a different variant would diverge silently.
Baseline is bit-for-bit what it was, asserted across seat counts and
seeds. A variant system that perturbs the baseline invalidates every
measurement this repo has.
H1-A and H1-B implemented from rules_delta.yaml and mutation-proven on
their own defects: "unclaimed" misread as face-up-and-unsolved, and the
attacker's Stress read after the attack's effects. Their `unchanged:` list
is asserted rather than trusted — that list is their claim about their own
experiment.
Measured, and three of their four criteria fail. DARVO arm rate is still
0 under greedy; ATTACK selection does not rise and falls for the rank-75
policy; group success collapses from 165/190/200 to 0 at 3/4/6 seats.
The mechanism is not the assumed one: greedy answers the pressure by
regulating, Stress plateaus at 3, so it never reaches the gate at 4 or the
arm at 5 — H1-A acts as a solve-rate tax and H1-B is unreachable under
competent play.
A harness defect was caught before the claim: sweep discarded refused
games silently and never reported its count, so "nobody won" and "nothing
played" printed identically. Reporting H1 as unwinnable on that basis
would have been the ADR-0018 family aimed at another repo's design. All
200 games ran in every cell; the zeros are real.
Chaos d8 = 8 — the window's first override, redrew L against a structural
L, so it changed nothing. Window 3 recorded in ChaosRollHistory.
NOT REVIEWED: tier L owes a separate-agent adversarial review, and no H1
result may reach ground-game until it has run.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 00:50:08 +02:00
| # | criterion | verdict |
|---|---|---|
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Thirteen challenges, five FATAL, all five conceded. Nothing had reached
ground-game, which is the only reason this is a correction and not a
retraction.
The worst: `Reactive` was not "greedy with one preference changed". It
differed in five, including SpendFreedom — ranked 95 unconditionally
against greedy's `95 if gated else 0` — so the seat burned its Freedom
token in round one of every game. A second change to the exact mechanism
under study, and every number in CB-EV-0031 was measuring it. The pass
claimed ADR-0018's one-varying-parameter discipline in its own workplan
while violating it. GreedyPolicy::rank is now public and the policy
delegates, overriding one match arm, so the control is structurally true.
Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker". Disabling
H1-B under the corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and
defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed. The
supporting inference was invalid anyway: final Stress cannot show who
armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives its owner -2.
Corrected: criterion 1 was failed on the greedy column while the pass's
own printed table showed 31-1000 arms in the other columns — the
selective-column move, in the file that names it. "Peak Stress was 1" was
a maximum over StressSet payloads, not held state (true: 2); the baseline
game count was 1,600 not 3,200; and "a reckless policy plays identically
to a careful one" is refuted by this repo's own rank-95 policy.
Inert controls replaced, each verified red against the reviewer's own
mutation: the baseline hash test compared two identically-constructed
states (serde(skip) on variant left 57/57 green); the `unchanged:` test
checked 3 of 7 entries and passed with SOLVE made illegal; H1-A's ordering
and H1-B's OU-cancel path had no test at all.
edition-check now covers catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml, whose digests
CB-WP-0038 claimed and never recorded — the review found it and reported
it unverified rather than absent, which was the right call.
Still open: H1-B on the DARVO extra-Attack path is untested, regulation.rs
still skips setup failures silently, and round-5 arms are counted though
they can never act.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 02:02:35 +02:00
| 1 | DARVO arm rate non-trivial, "not 0/500" | **not a flat fail.** **0** under greedy; **81– under rank-75 and rank-95, baseline *and* H1. It fails for a seat that regulates and passes for one that does not — see [CB-EV-0031 ](CB-EV-0031-a-seat-that-does-not-regulate.md ) |
| 2 | ATTACK selection rises for some subpopulation | **mixed.** Greedy attacks **0** times; rank-75's ATTACK *fell* 604 → 180 at 2p; the unregulated seat's rose 0 → 726 |
CB-WP-0038: variant selection, H1 implemented, and H1 measured
ground-game packages hypotheses as selectable rules variants — a catalog,
a rules_delta.yaml, and prose — and their note is explicit that CSV text
alone is not executable here. So the kernel gains a Variant in game state:
in the state, therefore in the hash, therefore in the recording, because a
scenario replayed under a different variant would diverge silently.
Baseline is bit-for-bit what it was, asserted across seat counts and
seeds. A variant system that perturbs the baseline invalidates every
measurement this repo has.
H1-A and H1-B implemented from rules_delta.yaml and mutation-proven on
their own defects: "unclaimed" misread as face-up-and-unsolved, and the
attacker's Stress read after the attack's effects. Their `unchanged:` list
is asserted rather than trusted — that list is their claim about their own
experiment.
Measured, and three of their four criteria fail. DARVO arm rate is still
0 under greedy; ATTACK selection does not rise and falls for the rank-75
policy; group success collapses from 165/190/200 to 0 at 3/4/6 seats.
The mechanism is not the assumed one: greedy answers the pressure by
regulating, Stress plateaus at 3, so it never reaches the gate at 4 or the
arm at 5 — H1-A acts as a solve-rate tax and H1-B is unreachable under
competent play.
A harness defect was caught before the claim: sweep discarded refused
games silently and never reported its count, so "nobody won" and "nothing
played" printed identically. Reporting H1 as unwinnable on that basis
would have been the ADR-0018 family aimed at another repo's design. All
200 games ran in every cell; the zeros are real.
Chaos d8 = 8 — the window's first override, redrew L against a structural
L, so it changed nothing. Window 3 recorded in ChaosRollHistory.
NOT REVIEWED: tier L owes a separate-agent adversarial review, and no H1
result may reach ground-game until it has run.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 00:50:08 +02:00
| 3 | group success does not collapse | **fails hardest** — greedy's wins go **165 → 0** (3p), **190 → 0** (4p), **200 → 0** (6p) |
| 4 | Bond/GROUND stay better than DARVO | holds, but **vacuously** : DARVO never fires |
SHARED GROUND, greedy column, 200 games per cell:
| seats | baseline won | H1 won |
|---|---:|---:|
| 2p | 132 | **68** |
| 3p | 165 | **0** |
| 4p | 190 | **0** |
| 6p | 200 | **0** |
## 2. Why — and the mechanism is not the one H1 assumed
H1-A was meant to raise Stress toward the DARVO arm at 5. **It does not
get there under competent play.** One 3-player game, seed 1:
| | rounds | final Stress | Problems unclaimed | DARVO armed | outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| baseline | 5 | 0, 1, 2 | 0 | 0 | 9 of 7 — **success** |
| H1 | 5 | 3, 3, 3 | 2 | 0 | 4 of 7 — **failure** |
**Greedy spends its actions on Stress instead of Problems.** The pressure
is answered by regulating, so Stress plateaus around 3 — below the gate at
4 and well below the arm at 5 — while two Problems go unclaimed and the
total lands under the threshold.
**So H1-A behaves as a solve-rate tax, not as DARVO pressure.** And since
Stress never reaches 4, **H1-B never fires at all under competent play** :
the self-soothe is unreachable by the policy it was designed to tempt.
**The seat-count pattern is the tell.** At 2p — three Problems, so a table
can clear the board — H1 *helps* in SHARED (132 → 68 is a fall, but 2p is
the only band that still wins at all). At 3p and above the board is bigger
than the pressure allows a table to clear, and success goes to zero. The
tax scales with the number of Problems; the intended effect does not.
## 3. The harness defect caught before the claim
The first run showed `won` , `atk` and `darvo` **all exactly 0** at 3+
seats. That is the signature of games being *discarded* , not lost.
`sweep` had `let Ok(g) = play(st, &mut ps) else { continue };` and **never
reported its game count**, so a run in which nothing played and a run in
which nothing won were the same output.
> **Reporting "H1 makes the game unwinnable" when the truth might have
> been "our harness threw every H1 game away" would have been the
> ADR-0018 family — aimed, this time, at another repository's design
> decision.**
Instrumented: setup failures counted, `play` errors captured and printed,
`games != 200` reported. **All 200 ran in every cell.** The zeros are
real, and now they are known to be real.
## 4. What this evidence does not say
- **It does not say H1 is a bad idea.** It says these two deltas, at these
magnitudes, measured by this panel, do not do what §3.2 asks. Their §6
already has the branch for it: *"H1 measured | DARVO still ~0 | add Idea
2 last-place stress (semi only) as H2"*.
- **The panel is greedy-family throughout** — greedy, and greedy with
ATTACK reranked to 75 and 95. Plural, per RetrospectiveAnalysis §4.1,
but not diverse. A policy that *manages Stress badly* would reach 5 and
arm DARVO, and none of these do. **That is the obvious next measurement
and it has not been run.**
- **No felt-play.** GROUND-WP-0003 T01–
and 200-game aggregates cannot say what a table feels like.
## 5. A tuning direction, offered as a question and not a finding
If the aim is Stress reaching 5 sometimes, the tax must outrun regulation.
Candidates, none measured: pressure scaling with the *number* of unclaimed
Problems rather than a flat +1; applying it only above a Round threshold;
or lowering the DARVO arm below 5. **Each is a rules change and therefore
ground-game's to make, not ours to propose as a fix.**
## 6. Cost
`make cost` , not inlined. One vendored catalog and one experiment package;
no new dependency.
## Open after this pass
- **The tier-L adversarial review**, before any of this travels.
- **A policy that regulates badly**, which is the measurement §4 names.
- **H1-B has never been observed firing** in a real game — only in a unit
test. A delta that competent play cannot reach is untested where it
matters.
