16 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 704b99975b |
Apply ground-game's rulings: mastery in points, four boards, and a
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
vendor tool that covers what the gate checks
They ruled on all seven items the same day. Two were actionable here.
F28 RULED: points. Modes.csv MODE_COOP clarified upstream to say
"penalties apply to points, not card count"; mastery is now
total - blame - denied. A recorded scenario went red on it --
gr-e02-shared-ground pinned 0 (2 claimed CARDS - 1 - 1) and now expects
2 (4 POINTS - 1 - 1). The number moved because the rule was decided, not
because the engine drifted, and the scenario records both rulings; its
schema has no field for a second one, so both live in ruled_note with
`ruled` carrying the LATEST date.
F29 RULED not-intended and APPLIED upstream: SCN_02's suits re-tuned the
same day. The characterisation test is how we found out -- it pinned the
duplication, went red on the re-tune, and that red WAS the notification.
It now asserts every pair distinct, the stronger statement the
duplication had made unavailable. SCN_02 re-measures at 73 at 2p, not
67: its own board now.
F26/F30 ruled and recorded. F30's ruling incidentally confirms our
reading -- they name priority-2's suit as the first lever, which is the
difference we identified without having measured causation.
vendor-editions grew twice, both times because it covered less than the
gate it exists to satisfy:
- It refused to touch ground-darvo-r0/ on the reasoning that the
baseline is "a separate record". That was wrong within the hour:
ground-game clarified Modes.csv and `make vendor` reported a clean
sync while edition-check went red. A sync tool that covers less than
its check reports success into a red gate.
- Its two-block rewrite DETECTED which fence held which set and
preserved the arrangement -- faithfully preserving a swap an earlier
write had introduced, leaving each fence under a heading describing
the other. edition-check reads every sha256 line flat and passed
throughout: a document can be self-consistently wrong and green.
Order is now asserted, with a control that goes red on a swap.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
|||
| 3045eb03f8 |
CB-WP-0049 T02/T03: a seat that plays its objective, and F27 splits in two
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Has been cancelled
objective() reads GroundState::score (now public) rather than restating
what winning is; a copy in the bot would disagree with the kernel the
first time ground-game rules on F28.
Working out WHERE the modes can differ was most of the task and it
bounds the result: SOLVE always claims for the actor, so own-score and
group-score want the same SOLVE nearly everywhere. That is a fact about
GROUND's action set, not a shortcoming of the bot. Two real divergences,
both readable off the table: SUPPORT regulates someone else (worth less
against a rival, worth MORE under coalitions where a Bond merges them
into my side), and SOLVE's value is the card's value, which greedy
ignores entirely.
THE RESULT — F27 splits in two:
group success UNCHANGED in 34 of 36 cells
who wins MOVES: BONDED COALITIONS at 4p goes 2.04 -> 2.98,
2.12 -> 3.29, 2.05 -> 3.01 winning seats per game
So "the competitive modes are scoring lenses over cooperative play" was
too strong and is withdrawn. The sharper claim: GROUND's scoring modes
change WHO WINS, not WHETHER THE GROUP SUCCEEDS. And the effect is
seat-band dependent -- 2p none, 4p largest, 6p none under coalitions;
two relation slots capping network growth is a candidate explanation and
is untested.
The panel now prints BOTH policies side by side. That was a correction
mid-task: the first version printed only the new one and I compared it
against a figure remembered from CB-WP-0047 -- a comparison against a
board nobody re-ran.
Control that makes the numbers mean anything: under SHARED GROUND the
two policies agree at all but <=2 decision points across 12 boards, so a
moving column is mode-awareness and not simply a different bot.
Also: two T01 tests keyed on `status: proposed`, which ground-game
renamed to `ready-for-implement` mid-session. They now find the module
by asking resolve() -- the structural property is ours and does not move
when another repo edits its vocabulary.
Also: `make vendor` replaces three hand re-vendors with a tool that
regenerates digests by walking editions/, and reports one-sided files
rather than resolving them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
|||
| bff64053ca |
ADR-0022 + CB-WP-0048 T00: the selector decision, and the mirror held
The maintainer's observation decided the design: aspects partition the GAME, strata partition our apparatus, and they are orthogonal. A module is one coordinate change in aspect space with an obligation in every stratum. So aspect identity must NOT be Rust types -- an aspect ground-game adds would make clay-borg fail to parse a configuration rather than fail to run it, welding the two coordinate systems at the one place they must stay independent. Chosen: identity as data (Configuration round-trips anything the catalog names), behaviour exhaustive (Rules, no catch-all), resolve() between. Decisive argument: the catalog ALREADY ships modules with a rules_delta and status: proposed, so a per-aspect enum would report them as "unknown module" -- indistinguishable from a typo, a false statement about the edition, and this project's signature failure shape. Two facts need two errors. Federating design authority is permanent, so the representation must outlive the implementation. Legacy ids alias forever through the catalog's own legacy_experiment_id, on the standard-Np precedent: 26 recordings name them and the expansion is exact, so there is nothing to deprecate. T00 done: the schema-2 mirror had arrived with no digests (19 files) and edition-check was red. Digests are now generated by WALKING editions/, not typed -- two reviews already found hand-written lists that made their own controls vacuous, and a mirror that grows a directory is what breaks a maintained list. PROVENANCE-catalog.md was a file inside the mirrored tree that upstream does not have; folded into our own PROVENANCE.md, since provenance about the mirror does not belong inside the thing it describes. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| d30938b259 |
CB-WP-0047: all four boards, and every mode named on the page
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
The modes were already implemented; nothing had ever COMPARED them. The scenarios were not implemented at all: edition::deal has taken a scenario_id since it was written and the only caller passed the literal "SCN_01", so 15 of 20 Problem cards had never been dealt by anything. The seam was the whole mechanism and it sat unused, with nothing red because nothing asked. Scenario is now state (serde default SCN_01, so all 26 recordings replay unchanged), selected by preset `scn-03-4p` with `standard-Np` still meaning SCN_01, and by --scenario/SCENARIO= accepting ids, numbers or titles, validated against the edition rather than a pattern. The threshold now comes off the Scenario card, closing F25's hardcoded 5/7/9. The first version of that control was worthless and mutation said so: all four scenarios print 5/7/9, so reverting to the bands left it green. Split threshold_from() so it can be handed a card that disagrees. The header read `scoring CommonProblem` where the Mode card is titled COMMON PROBLEM, PERSONAL EDGE -- the defect CB-WP-0034 deleted from the move buttons, still standing on the line that says what winning means. The coverage probe was matching that Debug output and went red when it was fixed: third instance (CB-WP-0024, CB-WP-0034). Page now carries the premise, the mode's rules text, and the tiebreak. scenario-panel plays 4x3x3. Findings: SCN_01 and SCN_02 are the same board (identical cells, pinned by a characterisation test); SCN_04 is the hard board at 2p (52% vs 67/73%, the only deck needing two Repair); and group success is EXACTLY equal across all three modes in all 36 cells, because greedy never reads state.mode -- filed F27, the two competitive modes are scoring lenses over cooperative play. F28: SHARED GROUND's mastery subtracts penalties from the claimed COUNT where the mode card's shared score is claimed VALUE. Raised, not fixed; scoring is ground-game's to rule on. Also fixes design.py reporting a backticked path as no reproduction. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 04e26b3077 |
CB-WP-0042 T01-T04: H2's scoped stress, with the named defects caught
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
H2 is ground-game's answer to our H1 reading — that a flat +1 to every seat is a solve-rate tax scaling with the number of Problems. Unclaimed Problems now tick only the seats in scope: global (all), personal (the owner), bond (the owner's Bond network over Bond edges only, degree 0 falling back to personal), assigned by hidden priority so 2p never has the bond card in play. T01: the package is vendored with digests, and H2's Problems.csv is r0's with one column added and NOTHING else changed — checked, not assumed, because the delta claims deal_and_thresholds unchanged and a silent difference would make every H2-vs-baseline comparison a comparison of two boards as well as two rule sets. Scopes are read from the column, not derived from the priority in Rust: F25 exists because we hardcoded numbers the edition already carried. T02: owner and scope are new ProblemState fields, both Option and both skipped when None, so a baseline state serialises without them and every recorded scenario's hash is untouched — asserted on the JSON, not assumed. with_variant() replaces the bare field write, because state.variant = v would leave owners unassigned: a silently wrong game rather than a failing one. T03: every named defect is mutation-proven — traversing Rivalry edges, applying stacking once, a degree-0 owner ticking everyone, personal hitting everyone. The degree-0 mutation MISSED first: the fallback lives inside bond_network and the mutation broke the None-owner arm instead, a different branch. It stayed green until aimed at the path the test exercises. A mutation that misses is not evidence the test works. T04: ownership is not a permission. Filtering SOLVE to the owner turns it red, which is the regression this task exists for — the engine had no owner concept before T02 added one. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 55a475b1a9 |
CB-RES-0009: extensive form is the lingua franca
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
Two questions from the maintainer — is there a game-theory mapping to Ludii's language, and is that language formal enough to derive one from. Yes, no, and the no does not matter. The mapping is proven, not to be invented: "The Ludii Game Description Language is Universal" shows the language can represent an equivalent game for any finite, non-deterministic, imperfect-information game, extending earlier work limited to finite deterministic fully-observable extensive-form games. EFG is also OpenSpiel's object, so the same formalism connects description to analysis: Ludii -> EFG <- OpenSpiel. Ludii's syntax is formal and unusually so — a class grammar derived automatically from its source. Its semantics are its Java: a ludeme means what its class does, and Ludii effectively makes Java the game description language. So there is no independent calculus to extract. The formality lives in the universality RESULT, not in a definition of meaning. GDL has the semantics and pays for it in speed — six times on Gomoku, twenty on Amazons and Hex, over two hundred on Chess. Conclusion: do not derive a language from Ludii; target the EFG directly. And we are closer than the tracks assumed. The journal is the history, Outcome is the payoff, legal_commands gives the actions — and project(Viewer::Player(seat)) IS the information partition, built so a player is not shown another's hand and unremarked as exactly the machinery imperfect information needs. Three gaps: chance is folded into a seed so a game is one realisation rather than a game with chance nodes; perfect recall is unasserted, which CFR and exploitability both assume; and commit/reveal is the standard EFG encoding of simultaneity but is never stated as such. Perfect recall is checkable from the journal today and is now Track B's first task — if it fails, every equilibrium concept we might quote is unsound here. Also re-vendored the catalog twice: ground-game added H2 — scoped problem stress, applying End Stress by personal/bond/global scope instead of flat to everyone, which is a direct response to our reading that H1's tax scales with the Problems while its intended effect does not. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 0d66814386 |
Re-vendor after ground-game acted on the H1 report
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
edition-check's freshness comparison — newly covering the sibling packages after CB-REV-0003 #3 — caught catalog.yaml and VARIANT.md moving upstream within hours of the H1 report landing. ground-game marked the variant status: measured, added a measurement_ref to their own report of it, and rewrote the baseline summary around our finding that ATTACK is the sole inbound pressure. The check earned itself on its first real use: before round 3 those two files were recorded and never compared, so this would have gone unnoticed and our vendored catalog would have quietly disagreed with theirs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| c4a8a227c0 |
CB-REV-0003: round 3, and three of four FATAL came from round 2's fixes
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
The pattern is now measured over three rounds: 5 fatal, then 3 (2 from the previous round's corrections), then 4 (3 from them). The corrections are not getting safer. FATAL 1: round 2's short-cell assertion went into regulation.rs only. attack-value.rs — which produced every number in CB-EV-0030's DARVO table — still just warned, and the gate registered to close the finding claimed the property for both. FATAL 2, the sharpest of the three rounds: counting games proves they STARTED. Stopping the engine after one round gives 200 games, all-zero columns and exit 0 — byte for byte the signature CB-EV-0030 says the instrumentation distinguishes from a real result. Both harnesses now require every counted game to have reached an outcome over five rounds. FATAL 3: round 2's `.csv` filter was applied to all three loops, so catalog.yaml and rules_delta.yaml — whose missing digests were round 1's finding — were recorded and then never compared, and never checked against upstream at all. Only the parser loop filters now. FATAL 4: five of six tiebreak comparators had no coverage. GR-E04's tiebreak never executes in any scenario. All four are now covered and mutation-verified; the Blame key needed compensating claims to be reachable at all, since Blame also lowers the coalition score. SERIOUS: "peak held" computed the same number as "peak assigned" for every possible input — the real gap was that START_STRESS was an unchecked constant, now read off the dealt state; cadence="none" was a pure loophole, removed; sibling discovery swapped a hand-written list for hand-written globs and missed metadata.json and VARIANT.md, both named in the package's own changed_files — now walked, and it found them immediately; and "~72,000 games" was unsourced, make panels runs 17,600. Also separated two kinds of number that were presented alike: seats×games is invariant, 363 and 29 vary 7.1%-11.5% across samples. Round 4 owed. The conclusion is not that the work is nearly right — it is that author-made corrections to measurement work should be assumed defective until a fresh reader has attacked them. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| da58e78e4a |
CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
Three FATAL, five SERIOUS. The substance of round 1's corrections held — Reactive is genuinely one arm different, the five replacement controls are non-inert, the inert metric is right, the numbers reproduce. What failed were the CLAIMS about them, and two defects the corrections introduced. FATAL 1: the fix for round 1's #11 did not fix it. The assertion was `games + setup_fails == 200`, and a refused setup increments setup_fails while skipping games — so the sum is invariant under exactly the failure it claimed to catch. Injecting setup failures gave exit 0 over 196-game columns. Now asserts games == GAMES, verified to exit 101. FATAL 2: the correction to the selective-column FATAL was itself selective. "81-1000 per cell, baseline AND H1" and "31-1000" twelve lines apart, both taken from the baseline row; under H1 rank-75 arms are 59/0/0/0. Every cell is now printed rather than summarised, and the corrected verdict is the opposite of the one it replaced: under rank-75, H1 REDUCES DARVO arms to zero at 3p and above. FATAL 3: "DARVO arms 2 per seat per game" is 1 per seat per game, exactly, at every band. SERIOUS: the tiebreak oracle asserted only that the winner set CHANGED, so reversing the tiebreak left it green; the #13 defect's impact was claimed and never measured (72,000 games: zero divergences — real in principle, witnessed only by a constructed board); a 29-of-363 citation pointed at a file that did not contain it (round 1's reviewer did report it, and it was never transcribed — the record was wrong, not the number); the harnesses were run by NO GATE, so every published figure came from a manual run of an ungated binary, including the assertion added for #1; and edition-check's sibling handling — added by the last correction — was self-certifying, crashed instead of failing, and counted Markdown lines as coverage. Now discovered on disk, and it found a real gap on its first run: Rules_Text.csv vendored with no digest. Also: "peak Stress held" was dead code kept quiet by `let _ = held;` — the numbers were right by coincidence. make panels is now a registered gate. Round 3 is owed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 041c0e7c3e |
CB-REV-0001: the adversarial review, and it was not approvable
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
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> |
|||
| a928b5925c |
CB-WP-0038: variant selection, H1 implemented, and H1 measured
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
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> |
|||
| 627992bc85 |
CB-WP-0037 done: T03 classification and T04 evidence
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 5s
Reading Player_Mats.csv and Glossary.csv — which O4 had forbidden declaring about until they were read — found a rule. Player_Mats' choice_rule column IS GR-R03: at Stress 4-5 choose ATTACK or GROUND unless you spend a ready Freedom token. The engine's stress_gated and allowed_under_stress_gate match it exactly, and now have a tripwire. So Ornamentation.md gains §1.3: the unit is a column, not a file. Classifying Player_Mats as ornamentation would have thrown a rule away with the colour swatches. A mixed artifact is normal — a player mat is a rule printed on a decorated card in the box too. O4 is rewritten and re-grounded from provisional to rule accordingly. O5, O6, O7 declared with falsifiers. O7's is not theoretical: back_design_id is unread in four vendored files, and hidden information is what card backs are for. CB-EV-0029 answers T04's question per rule rather than as a count — yes, every checkable clause — and states the reading that result does NOT support: it shows GroundRules.md was a faithful secondary source for the clauses with behaviour to check, not that the engine is correct. 10 of 19 files vendored. Nine still unread, and Rules_Text.csv is the one that matters: every clause checked here was checked against our own transcription of it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 53109ec5e5 |
CB-WP-0037 T02: the engine's rules against the edition's
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
Vendored DARVO.csv, Relations.csv and Scenarios.csv — the three unread files that carry mechanism. The engine has implemented the DARVO sequence and relation formation/breaking from GroundRules.md since the beginning, and had never read the game owner's statement of them. Every checkable clause agrees, and agreement is recorded rather than noted: a survey that finds nothing and leaves no trace cannot be told from one never run. The two hardest clauses to notice were already right — Focus placed "even if the Attack was cancelled", and Focus removed when the sequence ends before REVERSE. The tests are tripwires, not derivations. The match was made by a person reading prose, and that reading goes stale in silence when the prose changes; each behaviour pins the phrase it was read from, so a reworded edition goes red and asks for a human. Mutation-proven by rewording the cancelled-Attack clause. F25 raised, and it is the real yield: Scenarios.csv carries threshold_2_players/3_4/5_6, starting_stress and round_track, and the engine hardcodes all three — a match returning 5/7/9, stress: 2 at setup, five rounds. They agree on all four scenarios. These are the most contested numbers in the project; the whole 4/6/9 vs 5/7/9 episode turned on them, and the engine has been right by maintenance coincidence rather than by reading the file that owns them. Also pinned: Problems.csv and Scenarios.csv both state the deal and the engine reads only the first. They agree; nothing was checking. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 631fb41fc2 |
CB-WP-0029 T01-T03: components you can count, and a supply that does not bind
ADR-0016, Tokens.csv vendored, tracks and discs on the table, and a supply audit that found nothing and says so. T03 MEASURED BEFORE T01 DECIDED. 750 games, 2-6 seats, greedy and random: Protection reaches 1 per seat and 2 on the table against a supply of 6; Denied 3 of 5; relation links EXACTLY 12 OF 12 and never more; Focus/Blame 0 conflicts. The link row is the interesting one -- GR-L01's two-slot rule IS the twelve-token supply written twice, which is the shape of a supply needing no separate enforcement. AND THE FIRST VERSION OF THE FOCUS/BLAME CHECK WAS WRONG. It compared a seat's own placed Focus against its OWN blame_from -- but that list holds OTHER players' discs, so they are different tokens. It reported 2 conflicts; corrected, it reports 0. Fifth instance of this project's recurring defect, a number computed correctly about the wrong subject, and the first caught before it left the repo rather than by a reviewer. D2: a token is a VIEW, not a type. The aggregate gains no `Token` -- adding one would create a second source of truth for Stress, and the first time they disagreed the bug would be invisible because both would look internally consistent. D3: quantity does NOT bind, and the reason is not the measurement. A component limit the rules do not state is not a rule. Refusing a seventh Protection token would enforce something nobody ruled -- CB-WP-0023's error inverted: SOLVE was OFFERED where it could not act; this would REFUSE where the rules allow. The check ships as a standing control, so a future violation becomes a question for ground-game (does the box bound the game, or do the rules?) rather than a bound the engine invented. Registered as F22, withdrawn: a stated negative, because a survey that finds nothing and leaves no trace cannot be told from one never run. D4: Stress on a 0-5 track that turns red at 5 where DARVO arms, DARVO on OFF/DENY/ATTACK/REVERSE, Freedom as the two-sided disc the edition says it is, Protection and Blame counted, Lead and Round on the table. Two tests broke on token discs and both were FIXTURE defects: seat_centres matched every <circle> and track stops are circles. Seats now carry class="seat". The table height limit went 460 -> 500 as a CORRECTION, not a concession. 460 had no derivation; 500 does -- ~800px viewport less ~120 header and ~150 controls leaves ~530, and the version that broke dragging was 620. CB-WP-0021 T06's rule is to fix the measurement rather than lower the floor, and an underived number is a measurement defect. make all: exit 0. 66 render tests, 26 cb-play. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 4b5b601ce0 |
CB-WP-0028 T01/T02: the cards say what they do
ADR-0015 and the import. F18's fix: "I don't understand the GROUND card" was never a design gap -- the card explains itself in the edition and we never imported the explanation. THE MEASUREMENT IS THE DECISION, and the gap is bigger than "one file of nineteen". Of the file we DID vendor, the engine reads 5 of 13 columns: title, problem_text, front_rules, reveal_effect and unresolved_effect were discarded at parse time. The cheapest part of this pass costs no new bytes and was sitting in the repo for eight days. And SCN_01 is hardcoded at lib.rs:1824 -- the edition ships FOUR scenarios and the engine has never dealt three of them. Nobody had said so. ADR-0011's revisit condition is measurably absent, so the dependency argument does not get re-run: across Actions, Solutions, Modes and Scenarios there are ZERO doubled quotes and ZERO embedded newlines. The hand reader's only job is comma-in-quoted-field, which it already did. Refusing csv on a measurement rather than on a preference. Vendored Actions, Solutions and Modes -- the text a player reads. Not the production artifacts (BOM, Print_Manifest, Back_Designs, Symbols). NOT Extensions.csv, which names content the designer placed outside the core; importing it would break the claim that this engine plays the edition as printed. It is now known to exist, which was the real risk. One Table reader with four callers, because a per-file copy is how a parser acquires four subtly different bugs. The GROUND card now shows "Regulate. Restore the frame. Decide." with its GR/OU/ND text on demand; Problems show their own titles where a priority number used to be. The load-bearing test asserts the text is a SUBSTRING OF THE VENDORED FILE rather than equal to a Rust literal -- a test comparing against a hardcoded expectation would pass for a hand-copied string, which is the drift this ends. `edition` came out from behind #[cfg(feature = "scenarios")]. It was gated because its only consumer was; the edition is the game's own data and the shipped runtime now reads it. Test machinery and game content are different things and only one of them is optional. And edition-check was written for a single-file world: it compared the first recorded digest against Problems.csv regardless of which file that digest described. It now checks every file both ways -- a vendored file with no digest fails, a digest naming an absent file fails -- and asserts ADR-0015 D3's falsifier directly rather than trusting it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
|||
| 2da19a49b7 |
CB-WP-0021 T01/T02/T05: the engine plays its own data — AM-7 blocks
ADR-0011 decided it: vendor the CSV with a checked digest, read it with a ~50-line reader, and let the hashes move. The declaration's constraint was measured against the WRONG BUDGET. It said a CSV crate costs 21,613 against AM-4a's 3,798 of headroom, '5.7x over, settled by measurement'. But setup and problem_priorities are cfg(scenarios) and are not in the shipped runtime at all, so AM-4a never sees them. Against AM-4b, csv costs 17,651 against 19,742 -- it FITS, with 2,091 to spare. It is refused anyway, on proportion: 89% of the budget's remaining capacity to read 20 rows. The revisit condition is stated (nested quoting, embedded newlines, multiple dialects). GR-S01 now deals Surface + hidden 1..=k as ruled, with edition values and suits. Measured: 6/9/12 available against thresholds 5/7/9 -- the game is winnable at every seat count, which is what the maintainer could not do. gd0001 is INVERTED, not deleted, and now also asserts the 6/9/12 so a deal that is reachable for the wrong reason still fails. Blast radius was scenario expectations, exactly as the ADR predicted: no scenario pinned a hash and no bundle is committed. Six scenarios and two unit tests updated, each with a note. gr-e01-threshold-unreachable-2p is RENAMED to -reachable- and rewritten as the non-provisional import check ground-game asked for by name. gr-e03's setup was restructured, not just renumbered: with values 2,2,2 its personal-edge test would have tied three ways and asserted nothing. BLOCKING: AM-7 fails at median 0.845 against its 0.9 floor. Isolated across three runs -- 3 problems + stand-in 0.97, 3 problems + edition 0.909, 4 problems + edition 0.845. State is BOUNDED (proven: identical after 5k and 100k events), so this is not the unbounded-growth defect AM-7 exists to catch; it is a bigger working set streaming a long log. Whether AM-7's floor is still right for a larger aggregate is a spec question and lowering it requires an ADR, so it is not being tuned here. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
