tegwick
041c0e7c3e
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 Withdrawn entirely: "H1-B suppresses DARVO in the attacker".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>
4.5 KiB
| id | kind | title | status | state_hub_workstream_id |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CB-WP-0039 | product | A seat that does not regulate | done | 8387cea3-fcaa-4d34-89f4-527074db1514 |
Purpose
structural tier M (adds a policy to the panel every future difficulty
and design measurement is reported against)
chaos d8 = 2 → no override
declared tier M
Declaration 11 of chaos window 3.
Why
CB-EV-0030 §4 named this as the measurement it had not run, and it is the one that decides whether H1's verdict is about H1 or about greedy.
H1 assumes rising Stress pushes a table toward the DARVO arm. It does not,
because greedy regulates: Action::Ground if gated => 100 makes
GROUND the top choice the moment the stress gate bites, so Stress
plateaus at 3 and neither the gate (4) nor the arm (5) is ever reached.
Every policy in that panel was greedy-family. So "H1 does nothing" may be "H1 does nothing to a seat that already manages its Stress" — and H1 was written for the seat that does not.
The one preference that varies
Reactive is GreedyPolicy with GROUND demoted below ATTACK, and
nothing else changed. It is the player who chases Problems and ignores
their own state — which is not a straw man: it is the commonest way a
person plays a co-operative game badly, and the behaviour GROUND's whole
Stress economy exists to punish.
One preference, per ADR-0018 and the same discipline as
attack-value.rs's Attacker. A policy that differed in several places
would tell us a variant is different without saying which difference did
the work.
Task: the policy, and the measurement
id: CB-WP-0039-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "2c509cdb-aedb-4dce-a21f-f16bcdf17d80"
Controls:
- exactly one preference differs from greedy, and the artifact says which;
- both variants, same instrument, same run — otherwise the comparison is between harnesses;
- the game count is reported, because CB-EV-0030 §3's harness defect was silently discarding games and printing zeros that read as losses;
- the answer may be that H1 still fails, and that is reported as plainly as the other outcome.
Done 2026-08-08, then CORRECTED after adversarial review (CB-REV-0001). CB-EV-0031.
This task's own control — "exactly one preference differs from greedy" — was false when it was marked done. The policy differed in five places, including
SpendFreedom, which made the seat burn its Freedom token in round one of every game: a second change to the exact mechanism under study. Every number below was measuring that.
GreedyPolicy::rankis now public and the policy delegates to it, overriding one match arm — so the control is structurally true rather than asserted in a comment.
It changed CB-EV-0030's verdict, and that part survives: H1 does reach the unregulated seat. DARVO arms 2 per seat per game, scaling with the table — the earlier flat "400 in every cell" was the broken policy.
Criterion 3's verdict is corrected and was wrong: reactive wins 66 at 2p against greedy's 68, not "nothing at any seat count". It wins nothing at 3p and above, and so does greedy.
The baseline observation survives only in a narrower form. Peak Stress
held across the 1,600 baseline games was 2 — the starting value,
never exceeded. The original said 1 because the metric maximised over
StressSet event payloads and the starting value is written by setup,
never by an event: wrong subject, in the pass that was written to
correct a wrong-subject error.
And the generalisation was refuted by this repo's own harness: the rank-95 policy is a reckless policy and it drives Stress to 5 under baseline. What survives: under the two policies here, neither of which selects ATTACK under baseline, no Stress is ever added — ATTACK is the sole inbound pressure.
The H1-B suppression claim is WITHDRAWN. It was inferred from a
constant that the broken policy produced, and disabling H1-B under the
corrected policy changes the arm count by exactly zero in every cell.
The inference was also invalid on its own terms: final Stress does not
record who armed, because DarvoEnded resets the stage and REVERSE gives
its owner −2.
The pass hedged the wrong variable — it disclaimed "the number 2" and defended "the direction", and the direction is what failed.