Commit Graph
4 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
JesseMarkowitzandClaude Opus 5 3652dc6fae Planning v3.9: record M11's long-run evidence, and correct what v3.7 claimed
The planning package still described M01 as outstanding. It now records the
evidence run on 96c1bf5 and the two product defects found on the way. It also
corrects three statements that were never true.

- V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md: result blocks for M01-M04. M04 is recorded as
  recovered through authoritative state, with the owner's acceptance of that on
  2026-09-13 and the positional precondition explained.
  Correction: v3.7 said this file carried M11 results against every REQUIRED
  test. None were written, and the per-test matrix is the M11 report's §F. The
  §P3 M11 disposition said the report records the identity diagnostic's
  findings. It does not, and the disposition now says so.
- BUILD-MILESTONES.md: the M11 status block records the long-run evidence,
  the write-lock and protocol-leak defects, and what is left for the reviewer.
- DATA-MODEL.md §28B: M11 added two columns, not one.
  settings.context_window_override (migration 94, ef25b0a) was never
  recorded.
- TECHNICAL-DESIGN.md: "Background failure observability" gains the rule
  that nothing in a turn writes before the model call, and new §15.4 records
  that stored narration carries story only, with the extractor's rules.
- CONTEXT-AND-MEMORY.md §51 and ADR 013: as-implemented notes for the same
  two fixes.
- README.md and VERSION.md: status, milestone map, stop rule, and the v3.9
  entry.
- M11 report §Q: the "not revised" note is replaced by what v3.9 revised.

No requirement changes. No code changes.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0136VBTMUKWYeU6G9HgbDbND
2026-09-14 03:22:14 -04:00
JesseMarkowitzandClaude Opus 5 d1988065e5 M11 report: M01 to M04 on a complete run, and what it took to get one
The first revision left M01 PARTIAL at 41 accepted turns, and that run was then
lost to a host crash with its evidence. This revision reports the 100-turn
evidence run on 96c1bf5. It had 101 accepted turns, three genuine restarts,
every scheduled history operation, zero failed post-turn passes, and recovery
onto a clean data directory 16 of 16. All 85 REQUIRED FOR V1 tests now pass,
with H09 NOT APPLICABLE on its own condition.

Rewritten: §A, §B, §C, §E.1, §F, §G, §J, §K, §N, §O, §P and §R. The §G.0
addendum is removed, and its history is §G.6.

- §G: the evidence run's timeline, context growth and recall. M04's
  precondition is positional: the planting turn at depth 1, the window floor
  at 54. The path is stated plainly: authoritative state, then the narrator
  restating the fact line in its prose, then memory summarising those
  restatements. The owner accepted state-based recovery on 2026-09-13.
- §G.6: all seven long runs, and why six of them are not the evidence.
- §O.7 and §O.8: the write-lock defect and the protocol-leak defect. Five
  harness defects are added to the harness table.
- §N: storage for the evidence run, and real-token headroom by the narrator's
  own tokenizer: 92, 23, 34 and 42 tokens across four runs, with the
  inference server's silent cut to 8,194 tokens stated.
- §E.1: the application machine, the CPU reference host and the GPU host,
  identical model digests, and the GPU dropping off the PCIe bus (Xid 79)
  about 30 s after the evidence run's last write. That long runs must log
  power, link state and kernel messages is recorded as a requirement.
- §F, §J, §R: A06, H01 and R6 no longer claim that every turn went over HTTPS.
  The GPU runs used plain HTTP to a LAN host and were not network-monitored.
- §B, §P: the black-box runs (browser, offline, identity) were re-run on the
  ef25b0a tree and not after the three later backend commits.
- §C, §K: the later commits, including migration 94 from ef25b0a.
- §D.1, §P: the identity diagnostic's results were never written into this
  report; the section the first revision pointed to was empty.

DEVELOPMENT.md: the pointer to the removed §G.0 is replaced, and a new section,
"Logging the inference host during a long run", gives the nvidia-smi and
journalctl commands to run on a GPU host for every long run. If the GPU drops
again, the logs show whether it was power.

Not revised here: V1-ACCEPTANCE-TESTS.md, BUILD-MILESTONES.md, VERSION.md and
planning/README.md.

On 96c1bf5: backend 1,421 passed, 17 skipped, 0 failed; frontend 161 passed;
lint exit 0 with warnings only. No code changes in this commit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0136VBTMUKWYeU6G9HgbDbND
2026-09-14 03:15:13 -04:00
JesseMarkowitzandClaude Opus 5 fedb7144d0 Say where release evidence must be written, and what the crash took
The M11 harness examples wrote to /tmp, which a reboot clears. One
100-turn campaign was lost that way at 97 turns. The examples now
write under $HOME, which is also the only place the browser harness
works. G.0 records what the run reached, that its evidence is gone,
and that M01 must be re-run before acceptance.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015aH3G73fEdh4qTQdZNUwty
2026-09-07 14:19:27 -04:00
JesseMarkowitzandClaude Opus 5 144406cd48 M11: what the server will actually read
The release-validation milestone, and the thing it had to settle first was
whether any of the earlier evidence meant what it said. M8 measured a deployment
enforcing a 4,096-token input window while the application budgeted 16,384.
Every request returned 200. What Ollama does with the excess is drop the oldest
tokens, and the oldest tokens here are the system block — the narrator's rules
and the campaign canon. A hundred-turn certification against that server would
have looked perfect and proved nothing, which is why this milestone could not
begin with a hundred turns.

So the application asks now. Ollama's window is a property of how a model was
loaded rather than of the request — sending num_ctx is accepted, ignored, and
worse, reloads the model at the server's own default — so the only honest move
is to find out and then tell the truth about it. /api/ps reports what a resident
model is being served with, /api/show what an unloaded one will load with, both
on the same host inference already uses, through the same endpoint policy and
the same TLS trust store. A verified window is a ceiling on the budget; an
unverified one leaves the budget alone and is recorded as unverified in the
turn's own provenance, so an old turn can be asked afterwards whether it was
built against a checked window. There is no third behaviour, and in particular
no hard-coded 4,096: a number the server did not say would be right on one
machine and wrong on the next.

The proof that this is doing something is a campaign whose canon sits at the
front of the prompt, 120 turns of history, and a 4,096-token window. The canon
is still there afterwards and the oldest history is gone. The same campaign
built the old way produces a prompt more than twice the window — the defect,
reproduced, so the fix is measured against it rather than asserted.

Two defects the validation found on its own, and they are the same defect twice:
something was true and nobody was told. A manual state correction of four
changes with one bad reference applied three, returned 201, and said nothing —
while recording the refusal on the audit row nobody reads. It came to light
because the identity diagnostic's own fixture was refused that way and the whole
run proceeded on a campaign with no scene, which would have read as a model
failure. And the narration-length setting moved no number: brief, medium and
long each became one English sentence, while the numeric hint the model actually
reads was derived from the global reply cap and said the same thing for all
three. Both now say what they did.

The other two post-M8 findings are closed as well. The tab said AI D&D, which no
document had ever claimed it did not; it says Interactive Story now, with the
open campaign first, and the name is the owner's decision rather than a
find-and-replace to something narrower than the engine. After an Undo the reader
could not tell where they had landed; the control row now ends with
"Moment 11 · later story ahead", from the server's own answer, in the word the
transcript already uses, with none of head, branch or depth anywhere near it.

The identity diagnostic exists and the root cause does not. That campaign was
destroyed, so no cause can be established — what M11 owes the finding is
something that can classify the next occurrence, and a diagnostic that makes only
the judgements a program can honestly make: duplicate keys, shared names,
protagonist drift, state and context disagreeing. Whether prose misattributed a
line is left to a person reading it beside its prompt, because a regex cannot
read dialogue and one that pretended to would produce exactly the confident wrong
answer this finding is about. Its detectors are proved to fire against a planted
second Alice.

Two entities may still share a display name. That was checked first, as the
finding asked, and left permitted: a mother and a daughter, or a stranger giving
a false name, are ordinary fiction, and refusing them to guard against a model
mistake would refuse the wrong thing. What was missing was that it happened
silently. It is reported now.

Evidence, not inference: a hundred accepted turns against a real narrator with
genuine process restarts; a real browser against the built SPA; a container with
no network at all; a campaign moved into a data directory that never existed.
Each was discarded and re-run whenever the product changed under it, and the runs
that were thrown away are listed in the report with the reason, along with ten
defects in the harnesses themselves — because a harness that has only ever
agreed with itself is not evidence, and two of M8's five harness defects were
masking real ones.

No dependency was added, removed or upgraded. No acceptance test was retired,
relaxed or reclassified. M11 is implemented and verified; it is not accepted, and
there is no release tag.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qyn3oRd4D6pi72nKBG725B
2026-09-07 14:01:20 -04:00