tegwick
2806b3acb7
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 3s
T02 — all chance derives from one root seed. Three chance points, all reading it: the setup deck shuffle, the setup Lead draw, and the reshuffle permutation. The Problems deal is not chance at all. So in extensive-form terms the tree has a single chance node at the root. That test was wrong first, and the mutation caught it. It compared state hashes — and GroundState carries `seed` as a field, so "different seeds differ" was true by construction. Mutating the shuffle away left it green. It now compares the dealt configuration, and the same mutation fails it: a wrong-subject error inside the control written for T02. The reshuffle is a pure function of (seed, round) because K5 requires deterministic replay, where a real table reshuffles independently. That is a modelling restriction, not a defect, and it is now pinned. T03 — commit/reveal checked in both directions: before Reveal each seat sees its own selection and no other; after Reveal the information sets merge, because an encoding that hides forever is not commit/reveal either. T04 — ADR-0020 refuses the EFG port, and the blocker is T02 rather than T01, which inverts what the workplan expected. Perfect recall looked like the risk and is a constraint with a known answer: key on observation histories. Making chance explicit is the expensive one — the reshuffle would become a real chance node and break the K5 purity that every recording, replay bundle and trial-note hash depends on. A port would trade the property this project is built on for one it has never needed. Track B's first move is therefore a question, not a build: take "is exploitability meaningful for a co-operative game with a shared threshold" to OpenSpiel on a toy model, where answering it costs nothing. D4 states what being wrong looks like — OpenSpiel settling on a toy what three rounds of policy sweeps could not — and makes watching for it the next action. Taxonomy §4.1 records the EFG correspondence with the test that checks each row, so a later pass starts from a specification rather than a memory. Chaos window 4 at three declarations. Window 3's verdict is now two windows behind and should be evaluated rather than restated. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| ADR-0002-game-kernel.md | ||
| ADR-0003-cost-accounting.md | ||
| ADR-0004-am4-ratification.md | ||
| ADR-0005-assertion-coverage-and-replay.md | ||
| ADR-0006-adaptive-control-gates.md | ||
| ADR-0007-render-html-not-a-port.md | ||
| ADR-0008-instrument-corrections.md | ||
| ADR-0009-embed-the-js-engine.md | ||
| ADR-0010-what-the-script-may-do.md | ||
| ADR-0011-vendor-the-edition.md | ||
| ADR-0012-the-design-instrument.md | ||
| ADR-0013-could-we-have-won.md | ||
| ADR-0014-the-commentary-track.md | ||
| ADR-0015-the-cards-own-words.md | ||
| ADR-0016-the-tokens-on-the-table.md | ||
| ADR-0017-chaos-window-2-verdict.md | ||
| ADR-0018-a-number-that-does-not-move.md | ||
| ADR-0019-a-game-is-the-unit.md | ||
| ADR-0020-we-do-not-build-the-port.md | ||