fix(workplans): adopt ADR-007 derived identifiers

Records absent from central carried random pre-ADR-007 identifiers minted by
the retired local hub, which C-06 refused as stale references. Deriving from
the canonical record id takes no identity from anything.

Refs CUST-WP-0068-T06

Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 2583210@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: f2bff2d5-e9b2-4338-92ca-10282a927006

history/260808-h2-scoped-problem-stress.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+# H2 — scoped problem stress (personal / bond / global)
+
+**Date:** 2026-08-08  
+**Status:** experiment open — packaged as selectable variant  
+**Parent:** [H1 design + measurement](260807-attack-darvo-stress-design.md), [RPT-0004](../reports/260808-clay-borg-h1-measured.md)  
+**Variant:** [`editions/experiments/h2-scoped-problem-stress/`](../editions/experiments/h2-scoped-problem-stress/)  
+**Workplan:** [GROUND-WP-0007](../workplans/GROUND-WP-0007-h2-scoped-problem-stress.md)
+
+---
+
+## 0. Why H2 (after H1)
+
+H1 applied **+1 Stress to every seat** whenever any Problem remained unclaimed. Competent play regulated (GROUND); Stress plateaus ~3; SOLVE bandwidth died; group wins collapsed at 3p+. Direction (Problem → Stress) was right; **equal global tax** was wrong.
+
+H2 keeps inbound problem pressure but **routes** it:
+
+| scope | who pays | design role |
+|-------|----------|-------------|
+| **personal** | one owner | asymmetric load; someone can approach DARVO while others SOLVE |
+| **bond** | Bond network of owner | shared load → shared **incentive to SOLVE** that card |
+| **global** | all seats | rare systemic pressure (Surface only in this package) |
+
+Difficulty dial (later / WP-0005): vary how many of each scope are in the deal. This package’s first recipe uses **priority mapping** so seat band already changes mix (no bond card at 2p).
+
+---
+
+## 1. Bond scope — the interesting bit
+
+Bond today is almost pure upside (stress down, cancel DARVO). Bond-scope problems add a **joint liability**:
+
+- While the card stays unclaimed, **every bonded partner** takes the End tick.
+- **Any** seat may SOLVE it (matching suit) — including a non-owner altruist.
+- So the network is incentivised to **clear the shared load**, not only to Support through the crisis.
+
+That is the hypothesis to protect in measurement:
+
+> Do Bond networks clear bond-scoped Problems faster / more often than equivalent personal cards, and does that keep group success above H1’s floor?
+
+**Risk to watch:** players avoid Bonding to shed liability. If Bond rate collapses and DARVO rises, magnitude is still wrong (or bond tick needs to be softer than personal).
+
+**Network definition:** seats reachable from the **owner** by Bond edges only. Rivalries do not connect. Degree 0 → personal behaviour.
+
+---
+
+## 2. Package rules (summary)
+
+See `rules_delta.yaml` for machine form.
+
+1. **H2-SCOPE** — `Problems.csv` column `stress_scope`; mapping by `hidden_priority` 0→global, 1–2 personal, 3 bond, 4 personal.  
+2. **H2-OWN** — owners for personal/bond: ascending priority among in-play non-global, round-robin from Lead.  
+3. **H2-A** — Round End: each unclaimed Problem → +1 Stress to each seat in its scope; then clamp; then DARVO arm as r0.  
+4. **H2-SOLVE** — claim rights unchanged by scope (anyone with suit).  
+
+**Not included:** H1-A, H1-B, owner-only solve, shadow goals.
+
+**Thresholds / deal depth / start Stress 2:** unchanged from r0.
+
+---
+
+## 3. Hypothesis and success criteria
+
+> Scoped pressure creates stress **variance** and occasional DARVO under mixed policies **without** driving greedy SHARED group wins to ~0 at 3–4p; bond cards create joint SOLVE incentive inside Bond networks.
+
+| # | criterion | target (directional) |
+|---|-----------|----------------------|
+| 1 | Group success (greedy SHARED, 3–4p) | **Well above H1’s 0**; not required to match baseline |
+| 2 | Stress variance | max−min Stress across seats **higher** than baseline and H1-greedy |
+| 3 | DARVO | non-zero for some policy that still sometimes wins; not only pure reactive-never-wins |
+| 4 | Bond cards | among bond-scoped unclaimed time, networks show elevated SOLVE rate on those cards vs personal (or qualitative report) |
+| 5 | Control | if all scopes forced global, H1-like collapse returns (optional A/B) |
+
+Instrument caveats from CB-EV-0030/0031 still apply: plural panel; report sample-specific vs invariant; no felt-play substitute.
+
+---
+
+## 4. Safety / scope of fiction
+
+Cards keep existing scenario language (deadline, ownership, overload). No new trauma-personal content. Full `EXT_PERSONAL` (shadow goals, expose, win rewrite) stays **out**.
+
+---
+
+## 5. Decision log
+
+| Date | Decision |
+|------|----------|
+| 2026-08-08 | H1 reject-as-baseline; spawn H2 scoped stress |
+| 2026-08-08 | Bond = full Bond network of owner; SOLVE unrestricted by owner |
+| 2026-08-08 | Surface global; one bond card (priority 3) enters at 3p+ |
+| 2026-08-08 | Do not stack H1-B in H2 until scoped pressure is measured alone |