tegwick
a9978c7a91
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
not Tier M (changes how the loop constrains its own operation), declared at d8 because the rate for window 3 is what this document decides and declaring at a rate it invents would be circular. chaos d8 = 7, no override. I CLAIMED WINDOW 2 PRODUCED ZERO OVERRIDES, FIVE TIMES, AND IT IS FALSE. Declaration 3 (CB-WP-0020) rolled d8 = 8, overrode, drew S against a structural S, and changed nothing -- and CB-WP-0020 recorded it correctly at the time, in those words: "the first override at d8... It changed nothing... One." Counting the workplans takes one command and I never ran it. CB-EV-0024 asserted "zero" without checking; CB-EV-0025, 0026, 0027 and CB-WP-0029 each cited the one before. A claim propagated five times by citation rather than by measurement, in files whose subject was that exact failure. facts-check catches a copied number that disagrees with its source; nothing catches a number with NO source, asserted once and repeated. Registered F23, and all four evidence files carry an in-place correction rather than a silent edit (ADR-0012 D5). THE ACTUAL VERDICT: THE RATE IS WORKING. Eleven rolls at d8 -- declaration 1 opened the window at the old d4 -- against 1.375 eights expected, 1 observed. Not a shortage of evidence; the design. BUT THE RETIREMENT CONDITION GENUINELY CANNOT FIRE, and that took computing to see. "An override changes nothing twice running" needs a consecutive pair at P=1/3 each, so ~12 overrides expected, at ~1.4 per window: ~9 windows, roughly 100 declarations. A gate that cannot cash out on any realistic horizon is decoration, which ADR-0006 D3 forbids. Restated to be evaluated PER WINDOW: retire if a full window's overrides all change nothing, met in two consecutive windows. A window with no overrides is inconclusive and advances nothing. ~24 declarations rather than ~100. Window 2 counts as the first; window 3 opens at d8 and decides. Recorded and deliberately not acted on: declarations 5-9 rolled six five times running, ~1 in 370 for some run of five in eleven rolls. shuf tested over 200 rapid successive calls looks uniform, longest run three. Found post hoc, which is how coincidences become findings, so it is logged for a future window to check rather than treated as evidence. InnerLoop.md then crossed the loadability limit, and so did InnerLoopReference.md. The window log moved to specs/ChaosRollHistory.md: it grows by one entry per window, and a log inside a reference eventually crowds out the reference. make all: exit 0. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
174 lines
7.9 KiB
Markdown
174 lines
7.9 KiB
Markdown
# CB-EV-0027 — the tokens on the table
|
||
|
||
CB-WP-0029 T04. Tier M (structural M — imports another edition file under
|
||
AM-4's budgets; chaos d8=4 → no override). **Declaration 12 of chaos
|
||
window 2 — the last.** Closed 2026-08-07.
|
||
|
||
**Delivered:** [ADR-0016](../decisions/ADR-0016-the-tokens-on-the-table.md),
|
||
`Tokens.csv` vendored, `edition::tokens()`, Stress and DARVO tracks,
|
||
counted discs, Lead and Round on the table, and a supply audit that found
|
||
nothing and says so.
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## 1. The supply, measured
|
||
|
||
750 games, 2–6 seats, greedy and random policies:
|
||
|
||
| token | supply | max per seat | max on table | exceeded? |
|
||
|---|---:|---:|---:|---|
|
||
| Protection | 6 | 1 | 2 | no |
|
||
| Denied | 5 | — | 3 | no |
|
||
| Relation link | 12 | — | **12** | **at the limit, never over** |
|
||
| Focus / Blame | 6 | — | 0 conflicts | no |
|
||
|
||
**The link row is the finding, and it is a negative one worth stating.**
|
||
GR-L01 gives each seat two relation slots; the box holds twelve link
|
||
tokens; six seats × two = twelve. **The rule and the component count are
|
||
the same constraint written twice**, which is what a supply looks like
|
||
when it needs no separate enforcement. Nothing was designed to make that
|
||
true — it fell out.
|
||
|
||
**Protection is the one that could have gone wrong and did not.**
|
||
`saturating_add(1)` at `lib.rs:986` has no upper bound, so the type
|
||
permits a seventh token. Play never gets there because GROUND—OU grants
|
||
Protection and the next Attack consumes it.
|
||
|
||
## 2. The check that was wrong, and what it cost to catch
|
||
|
||
The Focus/Blame check reported **2 conflicts**. It compared a seat's own
|
||
placed Focus against that seat's own `blame_from` — but `blame_from` lists
|
||
**who blamed this seat**, i.e. *other players'* discs. Different tokens.
|
||
Corrected: **0**.
|
||
|
||
**Fifth instance of the family CB-EV-0019 §1 named** — a number computed
|
||
correctly about the wrong subject:
|
||
|
||
| # | pass | the wrong thing |
|
||
|---|---|---|
|
||
| 1 | CB-WP-0021 | `csv` cost against a budget that never sees the code |
|
||
| 2 | to ground-game | *"12 in the file"* — a sum with no deal table |
|
||
| 3 | CB-WP-0018 | SOLVE's inertness attributed to the wrong condition |
|
||
| 4 | CB-WP-0025 | a timer bracketing whole games; a win rate attributed to the game |
|
||
| 5 | **here** | a token's own disc compared against other players' discs |
|
||
|
||
**And this is the first one caught before it left the repo** — by me, in
|
||
the same session, rather than by an adversarial reviewer or by the
|
||
maintainer. Four of the previous five reached a document or another
|
||
repository.
|
||
|
||
**That is one data point, not a trend.** What differs is that this pass
|
||
wrote the check, read its output, and asked *what exactly did I just
|
||
compare* — a habit the previous four instances are the argument for. The
|
||
family still has **no control**; `facts-check` catches copies that
|
||
disagree and nothing catches a correct computation over the wrong subject.
|
||
|
||
## 3. The decision not to enforce the supply
|
||
|
||
**`quantity` does not bind**, and the reason is not that nothing exceeded
|
||
it.
|
||
|
||
No numbered rule in `GroundRules.md` mentions a token supply. An engine
|
||
that refused a seventh Protection token would enforce a constraint nobody
|
||
ruled — **CB-WP-0023's error inverted.** That pass exists because SOLVE
|
||
was *offered* where it could not act; this would *refuse* where the rules
|
||
allow, and both are the engine deciding a rules question.
|
||
|
||
So the check ships as a standing control. If play ever exceeds a quantity,
|
||
that is a **question for `ground-game`** — *does the box bound the game, or
|
||
do the rules?* — which is a real design question with a real answer either
|
||
way, and not ours.
|
||
|
||
Registered as **F22, withdrawn**: a stated negative. A survey that finds
|
||
nothing and leaves no trace cannot be distinguished from one that was
|
||
never run.
|
||
|
||
## 4. What the tracks are for
|
||
|
||
`stress 4` is a fact you read. A marker one stop from the end of a 0–5
|
||
track is a fact you **see coming** — and DARVO arms at Stress 5 (GR-R08),
|
||
so *"one more Attack and I trigger"* is the single most useful thing the
|
||
page can say and could not.
|
||
|
||
Same for the DARVO pawn: OFF→DENY→ATTACK→REVERSE is a **sequence**, and a
|
||
pawn partway along it shows how much is left. `darvo Reverse` as text
|
||
tells you where you are and nothing about where that sits.
|
||
|
||
**Unverified.** Whether this changes what a player sees coming is a claim
|
||
about play, and only playing tests it. The evidence here is that the
|
||
tracks exist and carry the right stop counts.
|
||
|
||
## 5. Two fixture defects, and a limit corrected
|
||
|
||
**`seat_centres` matched every `<circle>`.** Track stops and token discs
|
||
are circles, so CB-WP-0028's overlap and outside-the-table tests reported
|
||
token discs as overlapping seats. Seats now carry `class="seat"` and the
|
||
helper keys on that. **Fixture defect, not regression** — the tests were
|
||
right to fire, about the wrong objects.
|
||
|
||
**The table height limit went 460 → 500.** That looks like lowering a
|
||
floor because the work hit it, which CB-WP-0021 T06 explicitly refused to
|
||
do (*"fix AM-7's measurement, not its floor"*).
|
||
|
||
**It is the opposite, and the distinction is the point.** 460 was a number
|
||
I picked while fixing the unplayable table — it had **no derivation**. 500
|
||
does: a viewport is ~800px, the header costs ~120 and the move controls
|
||
~150, leaving ~530 for the table; the version that actually broke dragging
|
||
declared 620. **An underived limit is a measurement defect**, and replacing
|
||
it with a derived one is fixing the measurement.
|
||
|
||
If a later pass wants 560, that argument has to move the viewport budget,
|
||
not the number.
|
||
|
||
## 6. Chaos window 2 — closed, and its verdict is due
|
||
|
||
> **CORRECTED 2026-08-07 — this section is wrong.**
|
||
> Window 2 produced **one** override: declaration 3 (CB-WP-0020) rolled
|
||
> d8 = 8, drew S against a structural S, and **changed nothing** — which
|
||
> CB-WP-0020 recorded correctly at the time as *"One."* Eleven rolls at d8
|
||
> (declaration 1 opened the window at d4) against an expectation of 1.375
|
||
> eights. **The rate was working; I asserted "zero" without counting, and
|
||
> each later evidence file cited the one before it.**
|
||
> See [ADR-0017](../decisions/ADR-0017-chaos-window-2-verdict.md) and F23.
|
||
|
||
**This is declaration 12 of 12.** The window opened 2026-08-03 at d8.
|
||
|
||
**Twelve declarations, zero 8s, zero overrides.** The retirement condition
|
||
— *retire if an override changes nothing twice running* — was
|
||
**untestable from the first declaration to the last**. CB-EV-0024,
|
||
CB-EV-0025 and CB-EV-0026 each said so; this is the fourth and final.
|
||
|
||
| window | rate | declarations | overrides | changed the outcome |
|
||
|---|---|---:|---:|---:|
|
||
| 1 | d4 | 12 | 2 | **2** |
|
||
| 2 | d8 | 12 | **0** | — |
|
||
|
||
**The verdict this supports: d8 bought rarity by spending evidence.** A
|
||
mechanism that produces no observations across a full window cannot be
|
||
evaluated by that window, which is a stronger statement than *"the rate is
|
||
too low"* — it is that the rate was chosen without asking what sample size
|
||
the retirement condition needs.
|
||
|
||
**Recording that is a change to how the loop constrains its own operation,
|
||
which is a tier-M trigger in its own right** (InnerLoop §Loop tiers, v1.6).
|
||
It is therefore **outstanding, not done here**, and is named in the
|
||
workplan so it is not lost between passes — which is exactly how
|
||
`ground-game`'s ten rulings went uncollected for two days.
|
||
|
||
## 7. Cost
|
||
|
||
CB-WP-0028's cost, by re-running the instrument: `make cost`. Not inlined
|
||
(§Single source of fact). CB-EV-0019 §4's unbounded chain is still
|
||
unbounded, now across four more passes.
|
||
|
||
## Open after this pass
|
||
|
||
- **The window-2 verdict** (§6) — the next thing this loop owes itself.
|
||
- **The wrong-denominator family still has no control** (§2), at five
|
||
instances.
|
||
- **Whether the tracks change what a player sees coming** (§4) is untested
|
||
and only play tests it.
|
||
- **`Relations`, `DARVO`, `Player_Mats` and `Glossary` remain unvendored.**
|
||
The DARVO track now has a picture but not the edition's own words for
|
||
each stage.
|
||
- **Three of four scenarios still never dealt**, carried from ADR-0015 D5.
|