Two vetoes M1a recorded were global where the evidence is local.
Comparison required every selected base question to complete, so one unsupported
family anywhere prevented an otherwise complete target comparison. Completeness
is now demanded over the required scope: the counterpart question plus the
dependencies the change context actually recorded for it. Every other gap stays
in aggregate coverage and is still reported, never discharged. An incomplete
counterpart, an incomplete recorded dependency, an unknown-ownership boundary
and a truncated base scan all still yield unknown.
Correspondence ambiguity was recorded file-wide and inherited by every question,
so repeated unchanged lines in one file invalidated every question in the
repository and blocked the whole transaction comparison. It is now decided per
operation by the correspondence classifier: an operation needing an ambiguous
anchor stays uncomparable, while a uniquely mapped or newly introduced operation
in the same file is unaffected. The mapping is still withheld and still reported.
On the NodeGoat case the ambiguity is on the target's own file, so file-level
scoping would not have been enough; only per-operation resolution is.
1,347 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
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One prior control is superseded and updated with its reason: a new operation on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
