coulomb/clay-borg
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

CB-WP-0021 T04: evidence -- the endings are tight, and the cost chain snapped

Browse source 
Closes CB-WP-0021, four days after its code landed.

The budget was the wrong one and ADR-0011 corrected it: csv costs 17,651
against AM-4b's 19,742, so it FITS, and was refused on proportion anyway
(89% of the remainder to read 20 rows). Third premise this pass corrected,
second against a mis-chosen denominator. That pattern now has three
instances and no control -- facts-check catches copies that disagree,
nothing catches a number computed correctly against the wrong base.

The hash blast radius was PREDICTED, not discovered. T01's brief required
it be established before writing code and ADR-0011 D3 measured it: 0
scenario files pin a state hash. Verified today, replay-test 14/14 and
AM-7 at 0.985/0.998/1.018 against a 0.9 floor. What actually broke was six
scenarios' data, not any logic.

The endings mean something and they are tight. Played 2p all-bots: total 4
/ threshold 5, group failure, 6 available. T02's control predicted a full
clear is required at 2p and play confirms it -- leaving any single Problem
unclaimed loses at two seats.

T04's last bullet cannot be satisfied. cb-cost.py --slug CB-WP-0020 ABORTS
-- no transcripts retained -- and the instrument refusing to estimate is
correct behaviour, so the number is absent rather than wrong. 41.6% of
spend is UNATTRIBUTED. The quote-the-previous-pass rule breaks after about
four passes and needs a bound; this is the first pass where the chain
actually snapped.

loop-lint's own-cost rule caught the first draft quoting this pass's own
cost as final. Marked provisional -- the rule working.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-08-05 15:56:31 +02:00
parent 5e5894f47d
commit b1f4a85a4a
2 changed files with 201 additions and 2 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

27
workplans/CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md
View file

@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
id: CB-WP-0021
kind: product
title: "Import the edition: the game plays its own data"
status: active
status: done
state_hub_workstream_id: "782b1c37-f3a7-469b-87a3-fa73ebe758d2"
---
@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ collections.
```task
id: CB-WP-0021-T04
status: todo
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "ba76138d-a225-470d-bb2a-3a6881f4ca82"
```
@ -293,3 +293,26 @@ state_hub_task_id: "ba76138d-a225-470d-bb2a-3a6881f4ca82"
score against the threshold.
- **Quote CB-WP-0020's cost by re-running the instrument.**
- **Chaos: 4 of 12 in window 2.**
**Done 2026-08-05.**
[CB-EV-0019](../evidence/CB-EV-0019-import-the-edition.md).
- **The budget was the wrong one, and the ADR corrected it**: `csv` costs
17,651 against AM-4b's 19,742, so it *fits* — and is refused on
proportion (89% of the remainder to read 20 rows). Third premise this
pass corrected, second against a mis-chosen denominator.
- **The hash blast radius was predicted, then measured to be ~0** — ADR-0011
§D3 found **0 scenario files pin a state hash**. Verified today:
`replay-test` 14/14, AM-7 0.985/0.998/1.018 against a 0.9 floor. What
actually broke was six scenarios' *data*, not any logic.
- **The endings mean something, and they are tight.** Played 2p all-bots:
**total 4 / threshold 5, group failure**, 6 available. T02's control
predicted a full clear is required at 2p — confirmed by play.
- **The cost chain snapped.** `cb-cost.py --slug CB-WP-0020` **aborts** —
no transcripts retained — so T04's last bullet cannot be satisfied, and
the instrument refusing to estimate is the correct behaviour. 41.6% of
spend is UNATTRIBUTED. The quote-the-previous-pass rule needs a bound.
- **The sharpest thing in it**: the work that disproved GR-E01 is *in this
workplan*, and CB-WP-0022 was written the next day quoting GR-E01 as its
founding example. Nothing connected them until a separate agent ran
`git log` four days later.