# Chaos roll — window records One entry per chaos window. Split out of `InnerLoopReference.md` when that file crossed the loadability limit: this is a **log that grows**, and a log inside a reference eventually crowds out the reference. The rule itself lives in [`InnerLoop.md`](InnerLoop.md) §Loop tiers; the current window's terms are there. This is the history the verdicts rest on. **Window 1** (d4, closed 2026-08-02): 12 declarations, **2 overrides**, one each way, and **both changed the outcome**. The mechanism was kept and the rate dropped d4 → d8 (CB-EV-0015 §5, CB-EV-0016 §4). **Window 2** (d8, 2026-08-03 → 2026-08-07): 12 declarations, of which **11 rolled at d8** — declaration 1 (CB-WP-0018) opened the window and rolled at the old d4. Expected 8s: **1.375**. Observed: **1**. | decl | pass | roll | effect | |---:|---|---|---| | 1 | CB-WP-0018 | d4 = 3 | opened the window at the old rate | | 2 | CB-WP-0019 | d8 = 5 | — | | **3** | **CB-WP-0020** | **d8 = 8** | **override — drew S over a structural S: changed nothing** | | 4 | CB-WP-0021 | d8 = 7 | — | | 5–9 | CB-WP-0022…0026 | d8 = 6 ×5 | — | | 10 | CB-WP-0027 | d8 = 7 | — | | 11 | CB-WP-0028 | d8 = 1 | — | | 12 | CB-WP-0029 | d8 = 4 | — | **Verdict (ADR-0017): the rate is behaving as designed.** One override against 1.375 expected is not a shortage of evidence. **Why the retirement condition changed.** *"An override changes nothing twice running"* requires a consecutive pair, each with P = 1/3, so ~12 overrides are expected before one occurs — at ~1.4 overrides per window, **~9 windows or roughly 100 declarations**. A gate that cannot cash out on any realistic horizon is decoration (ADR-0006 D3). It is now evaluated **per window**, needing two consecutive qualifying windows: ~24 declarations rather than ~100. **Four evidence files claimed window 2 produced zero overrides.** They were wrong, and each cited the one before rather than counting. See F23 — the failure is a claim with no source, asserted once and repeated, which no gate here detects. **A post-hoc observation, deliberately not acted on.** Declarations 5–9 rolled six five times running (~1 in 370 for some run of five in eleven rolls). `shuf` was tested over 200 rapid successive calls and looks uniform, longest run three. Recorded so a future window can check whether it recurs; not evidence of anything on its own.