Skip to content

experiment: seal critical PTCNA evaluation result - #16

Merged
erinepshovel-code merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
experiment/critical-evaluation-result
Aug 17, 2026
Merged

erinepshovel-code merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
experiment/critical-evaluation-result

Conversation

@erinepshovel-code

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Frozen result

  • usefulness: FALSIFIED (target 0.3333333333 < 0.75)
  • superiority: FALSIFIED (target 0.3333333333 vs fallback 0.9444444444; advantage -0.6111111111 < 0.05)
  • 270 training steps and 90 evaluations completed under the 120-second limit
  • no backend or resource failure
  • plan digest: 67cdad3aefb3e33f6fbf3994de54e1b73a01105527bf241fce08947ed7046bbe
  • result digest: 3d73f08f3e0eeaf0f5e508aba762844c9e8d11b7146b654fd562aff425e30f13

The result was recorded before repair. Construction compatibility remains established; generalization, continuous geometry, EDCM validity, external validity, and production privacy remain unestablished.

Validation

  • independent arithmetic replay agrees with both verdicts
  • 171 tests
  • contract graph CLOSED
  • ratios 39/39, 234 verified, zero drift/gaps
  • deterministic metadata collection
  • sdist/wheel + Twine + isolated wheel receipt smoke

@erinepshovel-code
erinepshovel-code merged commit 2e7096f into main Aug 17, 2026
5 checks passed
@erinepshovel-code
erinepshovel-code deleted the experiment/critical-evaluation-result branch August 17, 2026 20:08

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 5c24444678

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

"result_digest": "3d73f08f3e0eeaf0f5e508aba762844c9e8d11b7146b654fd562aff425e30f13",
"schema": "ptcna.critical-evaluation-result",
"schema_version": "1.0.0",
"source_commit": "3d67f359af05e58c1e426dad14621d0e69b5ec4c"

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Record the commit that actually generated the receipt

When an auditor follows source_commit, this hash checks out the pre-preregistration tree: it lacks the frozen plan/runner and its evaluation.py still uses the earlier single-status/deficit API, so it cannot generate or validate this receipt. The documentation says execution occurred only after f202800... was merged; preserve the 3d67f... backend baseline separately and record the actual execution/evaluator commit in the sealed JSON so the frozen metrics and failure semantics are reproducible.

AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L35-L38

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant