Repository navigation
docs: note planned, gated Abraxas lab use - #732
Conversation
|
CC @Zero-State-LLC/partner-agents. Flagged for shared triage. |
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 6064617f60
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".
… correct rumor-spread claim
1 participant
Docs only. Do not merge without review.
Adds a short README section: Abraxas may later use Noema as a gated controlled lab for slang and meme spread experiments. States plainly that nothing exists yet (rumor spread off, hosted STUDY stub, no experiments) and lists the gates: live agent population, operator opt-in under Noema-Specs research ethics, informed consent plus independent review if humans are involved, protocol via Noema-Specs change control, lab results kept separate.
Proposed repo settings (apply manually):
Gaps not fixed here: README uses em dashes in several places; description does not say what Noema is to a newcomer.