clay-borg/evidence
tegwick ff89288581
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
CB-WP-0042 T05: H2 measured — it largely succeeds where H1 failed
Measured against ground-game's own §3 criteria, read from their design
note rather than reused from H1.

Criterion 1 met with room: greedy SHARED wins 120 at 3p and 175 at 4p,
against H1's 0 and 0, restoring 73% and 92% of baseline.

Criterion 3 met, and it was H1's clearest failure. Under H1 the
unregulated seat armed DARVO constantly and never won; under H2 it arms
and wins 13/13/57. "Non-zero for some policy that still sometimes wins" is
exactly the shape H1 could not produce.

Criterion 2 met at 2p/4p/6p and missed at 3p — 1.50 against baseline's
1.57 — reported as a miss because that is what this sample says. The
mechanism is visible: H1-greedy's spread is 0.00 at 3p+, because a flat
tax on every seat creates no variance at all. That is the clearest
statement of why scoping was the right correction.

Criterion 5 is the best evidence in the pass. Forcing every scope to
global and changing nothing else reproduces H1's collapse exactly — 120 to
0 at 3p, 175 to 0 at 4p — so the scoping is what saves it, not any other
difference between the packages.

Criterion 4 came out backwards and the prediction held. The workplan said
this panel might be unable to test it, because no policy here models
another seat or knows what a scope is; bond claim rates are LOWER than
personal at 3p and 4p, driven by suit availability rather than incentive.
Reported as untested with an incidental figure pointing the wrong way,
not as a refutation.

Wired into make panels. First pass declared after ADR-0021, so no chaos
roll is recorded.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-08 16:09:16 +02:00
..
CB-EV-0001-game-kernel.md CB-WP-0019 T01/T02: AM-4b asks what a contributor acquires 2026-08-03 19:04:54 +02:00
CB-EV-0002-cost-accounting.md CB-WP-0004 T04: fact registry and make facts-check — DFD gets a gate 2026-07-31 10:24:39 +02:00
CB-EV-0003-mechanical-work.md CB-WP-0004 T05: control loop — 6 points recovered, not 25-30 2026-07-31 10:27:09 +02:00
CB-EV-0004-assertion-coverage.md CB-WP-0005 T07/T08: control loop, retrospective, InnerLoop v1.4 2026-07-31 18:05:31 +02:00
CB-EV-0005-instrument-the-table.md CB-WP-0006 T08: control loop — 4 of 14 to 8 of 14, and a cost regression 2026-08-01 13:39:12 +02:00
CB-EV-0007-stage-0.md CB-WP-0008-T04: CB-EV-0007 — stage 0 is shipped, and the spend curve is a V 2026-08-01 15:25:19 +02:00
CB-EV-0008-adaptive-gates.md CB-WP-0009-T04: CB-EV-0008 — the gate changes, measured 2026-08-01 15:45:08 +02:00
CB-EV-0009-inspectable-table.md CB-WP-0011-T03: evidence — the chaos roll fired, and it was right 2026-08-02 02:48:51 +02:00
CB-EV-0010-render-port.md CB-WP-0012-T05: evidence — tier L deleted its own deliverable 2026-08-02 04:30:10 +02:00
CB-EV-0011-instrument-corrections.md CB-WP-0013-T04: evidence — and a rule about quoting your own cost 2026-08-02 07:32:07 +02:00
CB-EV-0012-execute-the-javascript.md CB-WP-0014-T03: hot-seat evidenced; stage 1 open on one human check 2026-08-02 07:58:59 +02:00
CB-EV-0013-the-inert-clauses.md CB-EV-0013: correct the cost table, and the self-quoting rule with it 2026-08-02 14:09:52 +02:00
CB-EV-0014-the-drop-target.md CB-WP-0017: legible interaction, and the chaos window's verdict 2026-08-02 22:42:45 +02:00
CB-EV-0015-legible-interaction.md CB-WP-0017: legible interaction, and the chaos window's verdict 2026-08-02 22:42:45 +02:00
CB-EV-0016-the-browser-is-a-client.md CB-WP-0018 T03/T04: explanations, and window 1's verdict 2026-08-03 02:24:13 +02:00
CB-EV-0017-budgets.md CB-WP-0019 T03/T04: the cost rule written down, and the lifecycle 2026-08-03 19:25:18 +02:00
CB-EV-0018-the-table-you-can-read.md CB-WP-0021: correct the declaration before writing any code 2026-08-03 20:35:39 +02:00
CB-EV-0019-import-the-edition.md CB-WP-0021 T04: evidence -- the endings are tight, and the cost chain snapped 2026-08-05 15:56:31 +02:00
CB-EV-0020-solve-legality.md CB-EV-0020: a gate moved the rule, and the report was wrong 2026-08-04 00:21:21 +02:00
CB-EV-0021-the-design-instrument.md CB-WP-0022 T05/T06/T07: the register, and what its first run found 2026-08-05 15:22:33 +02:00
CB-EV-0022-collect-the-rulings.md CB-WP-0026: collect the rulings -- ten answers that arrived and were never applied 2026-08-05 16:13:37 +02:00
CB-EV-0023-the-table-you-can-watch.md CB-WP-0024: the table you can watch 2026-08-05 17:32:48 +02:00
CB-EV-0024-could-we-have-won.md ADR-0017: window 2's verdict — the mechanism worked, my account of it did 2026-08-07 10:55:54 +02:00
CB-EV-0025-the-commentary-track.md ADR-0017: window 2's verdict — the mechanism worked, my account of it did 2026-08-07 10:55:54 +02:00
CB-EV-0026-the-table-you-sit-at.md ADR-0017: window 2's verdict — the mechanism worked, my account of it did 2026-08-07 10:55:54 +02:00
CB-EV-0027-the-tokens-on-the-table.md ADR-0017: window 2's verdict — the mechanism worked, my account of it did 2026-08-07 10:55:54 +02:00
CB-EV-0028-a-number-that-does-not-move.md CB-WP-0030: a control for the wrong-subject family 2026-08-07 11:35:41 +02:00
CB-EV-0029-the-fourteen-unread-files.md CB-WP-0037 done: T03 classification and T04 evidence 2026-08-08 00:33:24 +02:00
CB-EV-0030-h1-measured.md CB-REV-0002: round 2, and the corrections were not approvable either 2026-08-08 09:44:00 +02:00
CB-EV-0031-a-seat-that-does-not-regulate.md CB-REV-0003: round 3, and three of four FATAL came from round 2's fixes 2026-08-08 10:26:25 +02:00
CB-EV-0032-h2-measured.md CB-WP-0042 T05: H2 measured — it largely succeeds where H1 failed 2026-08-08 16:09:16 +02:00