robbond/confidence-engine
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

docs: clarify Confidence Engine context authority

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
robbond
2026-08-19 11:49:30 +01:00
parent 5b43c1b8f9
commit a12f9555af
5 changed files with 99 additions and 16 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
docs/current-project-state.md
+36 -3
View File
@@ -37,11 +37,25 @@ These are what currently affect the working engine:
- Deterministic reasoning pipeline from scenario reconstruction through graph update, propagation and confidence/completeness calculation;
- Unknown selection using atomicity and answerability checks;
- Question formulation within a selected reasoning pattern;
- **Question formulation** — remains an available capability (graph-backed question generation for selected nodes);
- Scenario API (analyseScenario / updateCase);
- Investigation turn cycle orchestration;
- **Reasoning-fidelity v0.8 (completed):** user-supported meaning cannot silently outrun the raw answer at the mutation boundary; evidence-resolvable uncertainty and user-owned ambiguity are routed differently at question formulation. A–F regression boundaries closed for this pass. See `docs/current-handoff.md` for closeout details.
> **NOTE on investigation ownership:** The user currently owns which unresolved
> investigation/question to pursue. Selector-led compulsory next-question
> optimisation is paused under Return-to-Origin. Semantic-selector replacement
> is also paused. Question formulation remains available as a capability but its
> output is not automatically enforced as the user's required next step.
### Reasoning-engine vs UX/product version lineage
The Confidence Engine tracks two independent version lineages:
- **Reasoning-engine experimental lineage** (v0.8+): reasoning-fidelity, investigation-state assessment, semantic selectors — under RTO pause.
- **UX/product development lineage** (v0.7): workspace layout, user views, loading feedback — also paused.
Do not conflate these lineages as describing one product version.
### Passive experimental capabilities
The following were built during Experiments 18–25B. They are isolated diagnostic layers with no active integration into the user-facing investigation:
@@ -85,7 +99,7 @@ The following were built during Experiments 18–25B. They are isolated diagnost
| When you need | Read this |
|---|---|
| Returning after a break | **First:** `docs/Confidence_Engine_Return_to_Origin_Methodology_Context_2026-08-18.md` (methodology continuity), then `docs/current-handoff.md` |
| Returning after a break | **First:** `docs/current-handoff.md` (current state + methodology anchor), **then** `docs/Confidence_Engine_Return_to_Origin_Methodology_Context_2026-08-18.md` (methodology continuity) |
| Where we are now | `docs/current-project-state.md` (this file) |
| Current principles and reasoning guidance | `docs/current-working-principles.md` |
| What to keep from code changes during UX work | `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` |
@@ -103,7 +117,7 @@ Historical documents are retained under `docs/archive/` and should be opened onl
Engine experiments advanced through Experiment 43, which diagnosed Clarify's absence across all real fixtures (zero eligibility in 10 turns). The orienting-based Clarify rule is dead code — the assessor never produces phase=orienting. The too_broad trigger is validly narrow but untested by any fixture. Summarise and Pause remain operational from Exp 42. Behaviour Selection remains passive and isolated. Open decision: whether to fix the orienting dead-code path or accept it as intentional design, and whether to widen or tighten the too_broad threshold with dedicated fixtures. No active tests rerun as part of documentation closure.
First document to read: `docs/current-project-state.md`. Then consult `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` before any code changes and `docs/project-knowledge-inventory.md` for task-specific references. The full experiment history remains available in `docs/design-evolution-log.md` but is no longer default reading.
First document to read: **`docs/current-handoff.md`** (methodology continuity + current state), then `docs/current-project-state.md`, then `docs/project-knowledge-inventory.md`. Consult `.claude/architecture-guardrails.md` before any code changes. The full experiment history remains available in `docs/design-evolution-log.md` but is no longer default reading — load only when a specific question requires it.
## Verification Marker
@@ -112,6 +126,25 @@ The current-state document was verified as accurate by focused code inspection o
## 10. Post-v0.8 Methodology Learning
### Carry-forward from Phase 1B audit evidence
The following material learnings are carried forward as durable context for safe later archival of experiment families:
- **Proposition phrasing materially influences deterministic scoring** (57-series / 60B.100):
Even when underlying meaning is equivalent, the specific wording or lexical form of a
proposition can change deterministic scoring outcomes. Phrase/keyword-driven semantic
priority is therefore brittle and must not be treated as paraphrase-invariant.
- **Decision-sufficiency reasoning is passive capability**:
Decision-sufficiency reasoning exists as a passive/experimental capability rather than
current user-facing routing authority. (Already documented in §3 Passive experimental capabilities.)
- **Ownership survives rejection**:
User-selected/active investigation ownership must survive substantive ties and
question-formulation rejection. (Already documented in `docs/current-handoff.md`.)
### RTO learning from Experiments 14–17
Since the handoff document was written, further learning has emerged from Return-to-Origin work (RTO.14–17):
**What proved useful:** An LLM can retain prior focused knowledge, revise uncertainty, and carry coherent reasoning across turns inside a single investigation.