tegwick
9643d7a7b9
Some checks failed
ci / check (push) Failing after 4s
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
126 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
126 lines
4.8 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
id: CB-WP-0040
|
|
kind: meta
|
|
title: "What a statement is about"
|
|
status: done
|
|
state_hub_workstream_id: "67f76fe2-0fd9-4ae6-a09b-1b5dc46d0e02"
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Purpose
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
structural tier M (fixes the vocabulary the loop uses to describe its
|
|
own defects, and states where the repo is going)
|
|
chaos d8 = 5 → no override
|
|
declared tier M
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Declaration 12 of chaos window 3 — the window's last.** Its verdict is
|
|
due, and this pass does not write it.
|
|
|
|
## The report
|
|
|
|
> *"It is hard for me to follow what you mean by error, failure, finding
|
|
> and correction because i often cant tell if we are talking about the game
|
|
> mechanics, the simulator, the telemetry, intended results,
|
|
> visualization, etc."*
|
|
|
|
**The maintainer is right and the confusion is ours.** Three review rounds
|
|
produced twenty-odd defect statements spanning five different systems, all
|
|
called "errors".
|
|
|
|
## Task: the taxonomy, grounded in canon
|
|
|
|
```task
|
|
id: CB-WP-0040-T01
|
|
status: done
|
|
priority: high
|
|
state_hub_task_id: "75758aff-724a-4e25-8597-b0a5135774f8"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Controls:**
|
|
- **grounded, not invented** — named sources, because a private vocabulary
|
|
is a second thing to learn;
|
|
- **worked examples from this repo**, or the taxonomy was invented rather
|
|
than observed (GameDesign §2);
|
|
- **a falsifier**: what would show the strata are cut wrong.
|
|
|
|
**Done 2026-08-08.** [`specs/Taxonomy.md`](../specs/Taxonomy.md).
|
|
|
|
**Six strata** — GAME, MODEL, ENGINE, INSTRUMENT, ACCOUNT, PRESENTATION —
|
|
from **Sargent**'s problem entity / conceptual model / computerized model,
|
|
extended where a simulation-V&V frame stops (we also own an *instrument*
|
|
and an *account*).
|
|
|
|
**The two relations are the part that was missing.** GAME↔MODEL is
|
|
**validation**; MODEL↔ENGINE is **verification**. Nearly every argument we
|
|
have had about "is this our bug or their gap" was that distinction going
|
|
unnamed.
|
|
|
|
**Fault / error / failure** from **Avizienis et al.**, applied within a
|
|
stratum, plus the rule that explains the whole review history: **a failure
|
|
in one stratum is a fault in the next.**
|
|
|
|
**And it finally defines the family ADR-0018 could only point at:** a
|
|
wrong-subject error is *an ACCOUNT failure with no INSTRUMENT fault*. The
|
|
measurement is right about its own subject; the sentence is about a
|
|
different one. **That is why tests never catch these** and why the fix is
|
|
never "add a test to the engine".
|
|
|
|
**MDA** supplies the game-facing layers and one hard limit: **our panels
|
|
measure dynamics, our trial logs sample aesthetics, and neither substitutes
|
|
for the other.** A win rate does not answer "is it fun".
|
|
|
|
## Task: positioning, and the tracks
|
|
|
|
```task
|
|
id: CB-WP-0040-T02
|
|
status: done
|
|
priority: high
|
|
state_hub_task_id: "bfc565ad-4eab-4933-9cc5-2581a797e48a"
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
**Controls:**
|
|
- **name the competition and be fair to it** — a differentiator that
|
|
requires misdescribing Ludii is not one;
|
|
- **every claimed differentiator is visible in the repo already**, not
|
|
aspired to;
|
|
- **a falsifier for the whole document.**
|
|
|
|
**Done 2026-08-08.** [`specs/Positioning.md`](../specs/Positioning.md).
|
|
|
|
**Ludii is the closest relative and the right benchmark** — ludemes, a
|
|
game in a QR code, far broader than us. If our answer to *"why not Ludii"*
|
|
is "ours is in Rust", there is no answer.
|
|
|
|
**The four differentiators, each already built:** the measurement is under
|
|
suspicion by construction; authority is federated, so the owner rules and
|
|
we report; what is *not* mechanism is modelled too; and a hypothesis is a
|
|
package with declared criteria rather than a patch.
|
|
|
|
> **Clay-borg is a design-evidence instrument.** Its product is an
|
|
> auditable answer to *what does this rule do at the table, and how much
|
|
> should you trust that*. Anyone can produce the number.
|
|
|
|
**Three tracks named, none started** — a second game; game theory as the
|
|
lens on dynamics; assimilated knowledge about why games work.
|
|
|
|
**Track A is the falsifier for the entire positioning.** If a second game
|
|
cannot be defined without reshaping the kernel, then "GROUND is an
|
|
example" was never true and the differentiators belong to one bespoke tool
|
|
rather than to a framework. **Every abstraction in this repo currently has
|
|
exactly one instance**, which by our own rule means it may have been
|
|
invented rather than observed.
|
|
|
|
## Deliberately not done
|
|
|
|
- **No game-theory implementation.** Track B is specified as a shape and
|
|
nothing more, because a solution concept quoted without its assumptions
|
|
is the wrong-subject error in mathematical dress — and this repo has just
|
|
spent three review rounds on that family.
|
|
- **No second game started.** It is the largest track and wants its own
|
|
declaration.
|
|
- **The register rows are not re-stratified.** `Taxonomy.md` §3 says a row
|
|
should name its stratum; the existing rows do not yet, and rewriting
|
|
twenty-five of them in the pass that invented the rule would put the rule
|
|
beyond challenge before anyone had used it.
|