CB-WP-0009-T03: InnerLoop v1.6

D2 the two exemptions — repairing the instrument that reports a breach
is always in budget, and the maintainer may authorize above-line work in
the workplan frontmatter. v1.5 had neither, and the first thing it did
was forbid fixing the budget's own defect.

D4 loop work cashes out into something runnable in the pass that invents
it, with the measured basis and the refutation condition stated.

D5 the tier table now triggers at M for changes to the loop's own
operation, closing the gap CB-RES-0005 §6 opened and this pass's own ADR
had to declare around.

The file went from 399 lines to 386: the chaos-roll calibration
rationale and the v1.0-v1.3 change log moved to InnerLoopReference.md.
Loadability is a gate too, and growing the file to fit a rule about
gates would have been the joke writing itself.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

specs/InnerLoopReference.md

@@ -139,3 +139,59 @@ A capability has completed the loop when all of the following are committed:
       ([CostAccounting.md](CostAccounting.md))
 - [ ] retrospective note (may be one paragraph appended to the evidence
       file): what the loop itself should change
+
+## Chaos roll — calibration (moved from InnerLoop v1.6)
+
+> **Calibration window, opened 2026-07-31 (CB-WP-0003 T06).** The rate was
+> d10 and the mechanism **never fired**: two rolls across two workplans
+> (CB-WP-0001: 9, CB-WP-0002: 2), against ~0.2 expected firings. At d10 and
+> ~2 tier decisions per workplan it would take roughly twenty workplans to
+> observe four overrides, so the mechanism was set at a rate that prevented
+> its own evaluation — the one option T06 ruled out.
+>
+> Raised to **d4 (25%) for the next 12 tier declarations**, then evaluated
+> and either kept, returned to d10, or deleted. Expected ~3 firings in the
+> window, which is enough to see whether an overridden tier produces a
+> different outcome than the argued one.
+>
+> **Stated cost:** a chaos-L override on work that would have been S buys a
+> full survey, adversarial review, and ADR. Measured comparable: CB-WP-0001
+> T03 (a tier-L survey) cost **$9.91**. At 25% over 12 declarations the
+> window is expected to cost **$20–30**. That is the price of finding out
+> whether the mechanism is worth keeping, and it is cheaper than carrying an
+> unevaluated ritual indefinitely. Both rolls are recorded in the tier declaration
+(`tier: M (structural L, chaos 10→M)`). **Record the roll every time,
+including when it changes nothing** (`tier: L (structural L, chaos 4)`),
+so a mechanism that never fires is visible rather than assumed. Purpose:
+an occasional random
+reweighting keeps the classification honest — arguing everything into S
+stops paying off when audits can compare argued tiers against the random
+sample — and occasionally forces a deep look at something "obviously
+trivial", which is where local optima hide.
+
+
+## Change log — v1.0 to v1.3 (moved from InnerLoop v1.6)
+
+v1.3 changed from v1.2: single source of fact is now executable
+(`make facts-check`, CB-WP-0004 T04), giving the duplicated-fact-drift
+class its first gate.
+
+v1.2 changes from v1.1: single source of fact; review targets the
+harness and states its sampling limit; correction vs retarget; the chaos
+roll's calibration window; the live cost budget. The design goal is now
+stated: **optimize for cheap correction, not for exhaustive prevention.**
+Rationale: `history/260731-loop-hardening-retrospective.md`.
+
+v1.1 — corrected from CB-WP-0002 (cost accounting) on
+2026-07-31. Changes from v1.0: the instrument must exist and emit its own
+target; inherited numbers are re-derived before use; every reporting tool
+exposes `--self-test`; cost is in the definition of done. Rationale:
+`history/260731-cost-accounting-retrospective.md`.
+
+v1.0 — survived its first full pass (CB-WP-0001, the GROUND game kernel)
+and was corrected from it on 2026-07-31. Changes from v0.2: measurement
+validity (the positive control), metric feasibility and instrument naming,
+four implementation rules the pass earned, and the requirement that
+evidence state what it does not support. Rationale and the failures behind
+each: `history/260731-inner-loop-retrospective.md`.
+