M1a measured that a newly introduced operation sits on a changed line, has no
base line anchor, and therefore stayed unclassified even with every completeness
veto lifted. Establish absence over the complete counterpart answer instead of
over a line anchor.
Correspondence now reports why a head operation does not map: `changed_line`
inside a recorded head edit, `ambiguous` where several base lines could
correspond, or `unmapped` where no anchor exists. Only the first supports
reasoning about an introduced operation, and only when the base counterpart
answer is complete and contains no operation with that spelling.
Movement is matched on the operation spelling alone, so a benign identifier
rename that changes only the source text reads as movement rather than a new
flow. The existing rename control caught that; the key was too brittle before.
One prior control is superseded and updated with its reason: a new operation on
a changed line in a comparable existing file is now new rather than unknown.
Movement, ambiguity, unmapped operations, discharged or unentailed claims and an
incomplete or failed base all remain unknown.
1,337 tests passed, nine skipped. No capability enabled; rollout stays NO-GO.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EmM1j46qgKMh3zqD1QMwEo
