clay-borg/workplans/CB-WP-0050-every-configuration-faceted-by-aspect.md

---
id: CB-WP-0050
kind: product
title: "Every configuration, faceted by aspect"
status: done
state_hub_workstream_id: "7d92daec-eb6a-4647-a1dc-5d374fdc9f0d"
---

# Purpose

```
structural tier  S   (a new panel; no rule, no state, no artifact
                      contract moved)
declared tier    S
```

CB-RES-0010 §5.4: *"hold all aspects fixed, vary one."* The selector
(CB-WP-0048) made configurations selectable and the policies (CB-WP-0049)
made them judgeable. This measures them.

## Task: sweep the points, and say what could not be measured

```task
id: CB-WP-0050-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "c7ec2919-7a1e-4f49-b989-67bfb7d25d98"
```

**Controls:**
- **one module at a time first**, every other aspect held at its default,
  so a row measures a module rather than a bundle;
- **profiles after**, where an interaction is the hypothesis — and a
  single-module profile is skipped, because it is the row above;
- **nothing is omitted**: a module with no kernel path prints as such;
- **a module that never acted is reported UNMEASURED**, by name.

**Done 2026-08-08.** `make panels` gained `module-panel`.

## What it found

**1. `attack_relief.self_soothe_ge4` has never fired. Not once.**

Zero ATTACKs in every cell, at every seat band, under both bots. The
module acts only on an uncancelled ATTACK by a seat at Stress ≥ 4, and
`GreedyPolicy` ranks `Ground` at 100 when the gate bites against
`Attack`'s 10 — so at exactly the position where self-soothe would pay,
GROUND wins. `ModuleAwarePolicy` adds 55 and **that is still not
enough**.

Filed as **F31, `unplayed`**. This also reaches backwards:
**CB-EV-0030's H1 verdict rests on its flat-pressure half alone**, since
H1's other half never had an opportunity in any of those games either.

**2. `problem_stress.scoped` is the only module with a measured effect.**
3p group success 85 → 60 (greedy) and 86 → 63 (module-aware); peak Stress
2 → 4. `problem_stress.flat_any_open` drives group success to **0** at
every seat band, which is the H1 rejection reproduced from the module
side rather than the package side.

**3. `scoped_plus_attack_soothe` is exactly `problem_stress.scoped`.**
Identical in every cell — necessarily, given (1). The first intentional
multi-aspect combination in the catalog **cannot currently be evaluated
as a combination**, and the panel says so on its own row rather than
letting the equality read as "no interaction".

## The defect the panel had, on its first run

It printed `85 / 86` for `attack_relief.self_soothe_ge4` — real-looking
numbers that invite the reading *"measured, no effect"*, when the truth
is that no seat ever created the precondition. **Its own docstring said
it would not do this**, which is the same shape as CB-WP-0046's wrong
reason for an open item: the claim was written before the behaviour was.

Two iterations to get the reporting honest:

- first, whole rows marked `never fired — unmeasured` — which **threw away
  a real result**, because `h1`'s flat-pressure half fires in every game
  and drives group success to 0;
- then, the **specific module** named, with the row's numbers kept:
  `0  0  4  0  0  ← attack_relief.self_soothe_ge4 never fired: UNMEASURED`.

The numbers in such a row are real for the modules that did fire. Saying
which one did not is what stops the row being read as a verdict on all of
them.

## Task: F31's falsifier

```task
id: CB-WP-0050-T02
status: done
priority: high
```

`GateAttackPolicy` ranks ATTACK above GROUND at the stress gate and
delegates everything else. **A probe, not a better bot** — its win rate
is not a recommendation, and the panel's banner says so, because a
column that looks like a policy comparison will be read as one.

**Controls:**
- **it actually attacks, and at the gate** — asserted on real games, not
  on the ranking: a rank of 110 proves an intention where the panel needs
  an occurrence;
- **blind** (ADR-0023);
- **the probe's row decides "never fired"**, not the others — a module is
  unreachable only if the seat built to reach it could not reach it
  either.

**Done 2026-08-08.** F31 answered, in two parts.

**(a) The module is unreachable in the printed game.** Selected *alone*
it still never fires: peak Stress never exceeds 2, so the gate never
bites and no ATTACK is ever gated. **A module can be unreachable because
of an aspect it does not name** — `attack_relief` needs a
`problem_stress` module before it can act at all, and nothing in its own
declaration says so.

**(b) Once reachable it is real.** Holding the probe fixed and varying
only the module: group wins +9 / +9 / +7 at 3/4/6p, and DARVO arming down
by a quarter to a half.

Stated as the conditional it is: *given seats that attack at the gate*.
The probe wins 12/100 where greedy wins 60/100 under the same module, so
this is not advice to attack and not evidence against F17.

**And it changes what we told ground-game about H1.** CB-EV-0030 rejected
H1 with policies that never attacked, so H1-B was inert for every game
behind that verdict. The rejection stands on flat pressure alone — wins
are 0 either way — but *"H1-B does nothing"* was never established and is
now known to be false.

## Not done here

- **The panel measures SHARED GROUND only.** Mode × module is a
  three-dimensional sweep and nothing yet says the modules behave the
  same under the competitive modes — where, per CB-EV-0033, *who wins*
  moves even when group success does not.
- **ground-game has not been told about F31.** It bears on a verdict we
  already reported to them (H1's rejection), and a correction we owe is
  worth more than one we volunteer.
- **The scope term is inert at round-one positions** (CB-WP-0049 T04), so
  `problem_stress.scoped`'s measured effect is driven by later rounds.
  The panel does not report per-round effect, and that is where the
  module actually lives.