Eight of nine group-3 tasks were rejected. Each defect was hiding a number,
and the numbers are why the loop was not learning:
- The fixed side was judged against the *vulnerable* side's function
ranges. 191 of 227 pairs with a resolvable labeled span (84%) have
different spans on the two sides, so a leak was recorded as silence,
always in the direction that flatters Youden.
- Round zero measured every family with the generalist. `family:unknown`
earns no credit against any real family, so every family but `unknown`
baselined at a structural zero and every noise floor with it.
- The cross-family sweep counted absolute failures instead of negative
flips. On a corpus where most pairs fail at round zero that rejects
every round for damage it did not do. Unscorable rows voted too.
- K runs was declared and never threaded; `pairs --k-runs` was parsed and
discarded, and its only test grepped `--help`.
- The meta-agent proposer was a stub, so `learning round` could never
propose anything. It now composes MetaAgent.evolve against a scratch
copy of the family directory, and `--proposals FILE` runs a recorded
sequence offline.
- `refused_holdout` was a vocabulary word no code path could produce, and
the covering test accepted either outcome.
- Cost was metered once, after everything had been paid for; a stage that
raised left no record at all.
- The corrected lever number was published beside the earlier one rather
than in place of it, and the test named for that property never checked.
- Refusals were `continue` statements: `Refusal.degradation()` existed and
nothing called it. A train-split identical twin was reported as
`split:train`, which is untrue.
Test repairs that each changed a number: two split tests measured an
`x = 1` fixture that teaches nothing whatever the rule says; two CLI
scoreboard tests asserted against all-zero output produced by a stub that
answers twice and puts its finding outside the labeled function.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
Task 3.1. A teacher is a vendored pair, at a review tier a maintainer stands
behind, on the train split, and scorable. Every learning path now asks the same
module that one question, so the split cannot be enforced in one place and
forgotten in another. A refusal is data rather than an exception: the path
records which holdout pairs a candidate touched and moves on, so a leak is
visible in the run instead of silently accepted.
The exporter refuses to seed from a holdout pair, leave-one-out teaches from the
train split while still scoring every pair, and the mechanism lever refuses a
candidate a holdout pair taught, because such a shape can only recover the pair
that produced it.
Measured and committed: on the vibe-py holdout the lever's own number falls from
seven detected and a Youden of +0.059 to five detected and -0.059 once holdout
pairs stop teaching, and the candidate set shrinks from ten shapes to six. That
gap is the inflation this rule removes.
Two existing tests encoded the leak and now encode the truth. The documented
export-to-improve flow had a single holdout pair teaching itself, and now needs
a train pair to teach and a holdout pair to recover. The obligation export
claimed the corpus seeds at least one obligation shape, which was true only
because holdout pairs were teaching: every vibe-py absence pair that yields an
obligation lesson sits on the holdout side, so the honest number today is zero.
The derivation stays covered by fixtures; the corpus gap belongs to the absence
re-harvest and to a maintainer pass over the splits.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
