9 commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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> |
