docs: record uncertainty-over proposition coverage
This commit is contained in:
@@ -191,6 +191,15 @@ Experiment 54N tested whether an interpretation disagreement can be judged for m
|
||||
- Final question regressed to generic wording (`What outcome would demonstrate enough value to justify launching?`) despite `selectedQuestion.nodeId` remaining the customer-signing node; full proposition preservation therefore remains unproven live.
|
||||
- Rationale contamination remained absent.
|
||||
|
||||
### 60B.30 `uncertainty over whether` proposition coverage
|
||||
|
||||
- 60B.29 exposed one more bounded synonym gap: `Uncertainty over whether...` was not entering the established `whether ...` proposition path.
|
||||
- `extractMeaning()` now extends the same description-start normalization to also strip `uncertainty over` before the existing `^whether` proposition extraction check.
|
||||
- As a result, `Whether...`, `Unknown whether...`, `Uncertain whether...`, `Uncertainty about whether...`, `Uncertainty regarding whether...`, and `Uncertainty over whether...` now all expose `whether X` before rationale stripping and evidence framing run.
|
||||
- Focused deterministic verification passed:
|
||||
- `npx vitest run tests/graph/question-formulator.test.js` → PASS (39/39)
|
||||
- **Still unproven live:** the exact 60B.29 `Uncertainty over whether...` customer-signing case through the full end-to-end runtime path on this branch.
|
||||
|
||||
### When This Knowledge-Management Phase Is Complete
|
||||
|
||||
Provisional criteria for review (all confirmed met by Experiment 38 cold-start test):
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user