tegwick
3a47e263df
Some checks are pending
ci / check (push) Waiting to run
Declaration 1 of chaos window 3 (opened by ADR-0017), tier M, chaos d8=7, no override. Seven claims in this project have been wrong the same way, and the workplan tabulates all seven with what caught each. MEASURED BEFORE PROPOSING: facts-check reports 62 untagged literal copies and fails on none, which is a real drift surface it names and does not close. CLOSING IT WOULD HAVE CAUGHT AT MOST ONE OF THE SEVEN. Instance 1's denominator WAS a registry fact and WAS correct -- the error was that AM-4a does not cover the code. Four others were fresh measurements with no registry key. A tag proves a number came from somewhere; it cannot prove the somewhere was the right place. Named as separate work rather than bundled, because bundling would let this pass claim a victory it did not win. What did work: every instance was caught when the number was computed a SECOND TIME by something with a different purpose. Two of them share a sharper property -- the claim was tested against a variation. #4's cost FELL as branching ROSE, which no per-node cost can do, and the tell was in the published output. #5's win rate was attributed to the game, and a second policy on the same deals gave 0% where the first gave 100%. So the rule generalises what this project already builds after each instance (the policy panel, the attack-value sweep) and requires it before: a measured claim must name the variable it depends on and show the measurement moving with it. A number that does not move when its subject moves is measuring something else. HONEST YIELD: 3 or 4 of 7, and it catches the two that travelled furthest. It does not catch a count never made, or a claim that is not a number. Claiming it closes the family would be the family's own error applied to itself. T03 requires the lint to fail on a real row by mutation, and to say in its own output that it checks PRESENCE and not ADEQUACY -- so nobody reads a green lint as 'the claim was verified'. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| CB-WP-0001-inner-loop.md | ||
| CB-WP-0002-cost-accounting.md | ||
| CB-WP-0003-loop-hardening.md | ||
| CB-WP-0004-mechanical-work.md | ||
| CB-WP-0005-assertion-coverage.md | ||
| CB-WP-0006-instrument-the-table.md | ||
| CB-WP-0007-session-shape.md | ||
| CB-WP-0008-ship-stage-0.md | ||
| CB-WP-0009-adaptive-gates.md | ||
| CB-WP-0010-consolidation.md | ||
| CB-WP-0011-inspectable-table.md | ||
| CB-WP-0012-render-port.md | ||
| CB-WP-0013-instrument-corrections.md | ||
| CB-WP-0014-execute-the-javascript.md | ||
| CB-WP-0015-the-inert-clauses.md | ||
| CB-WP-0016-the-drop-target.md | ||
| CB-WP-0017-legible-interaction.md | ||
| CB-WP-0018-the-browser-is-a-client.md | ||
| CB-WP-0019-the-am4-family.md | ||
| CB-WP-0020-the-table-you-can-read.md | ||
| CB-WP-0021-import-the-edition.md | ||
| CB-WP-0022-the-design-instrument.md | ||
| CB-WP-0023-solve-legality.md | ||
| CB-WP-0024-the-table-you-can-watch.md | ||
| CB-WP-0025-could-we-have-won.md | ||
| CB-WP-0026-collect-the-rulings.md | ||
| CB-WP-0027-the-commentary-track.md | ||
| CB-WP-0028-the-table-you-sit-at.md | ||
| CB-WP-0029-the-tokens-on-the-table.md | ||
| CB-WP-0030-a-number-that-does-not-move.md | ||