frontend-patterns/research/reviews/M1-SeedReview.md

M1 seed review — 0.1 packaging boundary

Reviewed 2026-09-27 by Codex, author-model. Candidate baseline 8cc7016. M1 result: revise/defer; not passed. The connected subset is suitable for a qualified research reference preview, not canonical admission or proven usefulness. Publication 0.1 and PatternSchema 0.1 are different version axes.

Gate assessment

M1 criterion	Outcome	Basis
Reconciled metadata contract	pass	WP-0002 T01, vocabulary and worked contract fixtures; candidates are not full canonical-schema records
First source and local-first contrast	pass, scoped	Source readiness; source identity and uncertainty explicit
6–10 connected drafts	pass for editorial subset	CAND-0001–0008 cover local persistence/propagation/divergence and shared-record editing/recovery; selection is not a global catalog cap
Two completed validated walkthroughs	revise	VC-01/02 include decisions, baselines, changed constraints and failure traces, but remain synthetic with unverified implementation assumptions
Evidence/counterexamples	pass for traceability; defer for recurrence	Documentation, pinned code and bounded runtime mechanisms are separate evidence kinds; full-contract independence unassessed
Independent human validation and usefulness	defer	Frozen pilot 18/24 in each condition after model-review adjudication; no naming benefit, equivalence or decision-time result established
Quality and recovery guarantees	revise	Requirements for retention, keyboard recovery, receipt windows and crash boundaries are stated; complete validation absent

Core editorial inspection

All eight records were read in full. Each has context, competing forces, a proposed solution, consequences, alternatives, evidence and explicit gaps. “Pass” below means usable as qualified hypothesis prose; it does not mean empirical correctness or compliance with every canonical template field. Reference manifest selects identities; candidate prose remains the contract source.

Candidate	Context and solution / resulting decision	Trade-off and alternative checked	Evidence limit / preview disposition
CAND-0001 Conflict Copy	Preserve detected divergent content separately; resolution remains pending	Recoverability versus clutter/review; immediate review or domain-aware merge instead	Joplin and optional Obsidian mechanisms, not atomic preservation proof; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0002 Local Commit Boundary	Acknowledge a revision and pending intent after a recoverable local commit	Offline recovery versus transaction/feedback cost; memory-only or server-required saving cannot satisfy the fixed brief	Storage motivation, no verified crash/flush contract; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0003 Pending Synchronization	Retain queued work and distinguish sent from acknowledged	Offline usability versus freshness/retry complexity; online-only writes are a different requirement	Joplin progress metadata, not proposed retry/supersession proof; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0004 Explicit Reconciliation	Compare preserved alternatives and commit a new decision	Information completeness versus interruption; justified automatic merge is an alternative	Manual comparison evidence, not provenance/atomicity/AT validation; pass, retain separately provisionally
CAND-0005 Local Draft State	Keep base, editable proposal and refreshed observation distinct	Recovery versus state complexity/privacy; direct binding only when no unfinished intent	Partial Zulip/Element and authored reload mechanisms, not whole lifecycle; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0006 Version-Checked Mutation	Check the proposal's expected version at the authority	Consistency versus repeated review; unconditional/commutative operations need their own contract	Conditional API mechanism, not complete frontend implementation; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0007 Mutation Outcome Tracking	Track operation-specific evidence rather than infer rejection from transport failure	Recoverability versus retention/backend cost; lookup or reconciliation when replay cannot be justified	Bounded API/SDK/source mechanisms, not universal deduplication; pass as hypothesis
CAND-0008 Invalidate and Reproject	Refresh affected observations after acceptance without losing drafts	Freshness versus network/invalidation work; complete authoritative response or subscription may avoid refetch	Framework documentation, no full frontend recurrence; pass as hypothesis

The preview links provisional relations with conditions and rationales, not mandatory architecture dependencies. A request for globally exclusive offline approval cannot be satisfied by combining these names. Backup, authorization and crash guarantees remain explicit implementation obligations.

Retain / merge / defer

Preview ontology review retains Conflict Copy and Explicit Reconciliation as distinct retrieval decisions, conditionally connected. Their ultimate split/merge remains testable. Mutation Outcome Tracking is retained as a shared review model/hypothesis; no new claim of standalone recurrence. The nine extension candidates remain available with their existing limitations and are not needed for core closure. No candidate promotion, ID rename or evidence-profile upgrade occurs.

Residual owners

• WP-0009 T01/T02/T03 (residual of WP-0002 T03, handed off 2026-10-03): independent human review, usefulness, fresh-scenario replication and M1 re-assessment; the M1 gate stays open.
• WP-0003 T04: storage atomicity, receiver replay/ancestry and recovery validation transferred from the completed source-review deliverable.
• WP-0003 T01/T02/T03: independent application contrasts, quality/AT and wider cases, and later ontology/M2 judgment.
• WP-0004 T01/T02/T03: canonical graph, held-out retrieval and empirical applicability retain their prerequisites. Preview candidate export is not M3 completion.

These are explicit work records, not a claim that the remaining work was completed by packaging the reference. The frozen pilot and original investigation receipts are unchanged. Review this gate again when those tasks deliver new evidence.

Fresh replication attempt — 2026-10-04

Replication 02 implements six fresh authored variants, equivalent guidance, atomic criteria and a frozen bounded runner. All twelve authorized attempts failed without answers; all pairs are excluded. No empirical scores or independent human evidence were added. M1 stays revise/defer; WP-0009 T01/T02/T03 retain independent review, usable replication and reassessment.