Skip to content

Requirements: observations are a fact layer (fix E3 bullet + temporal-split paragraph)#43

Merged
fazpu merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/requirements-observations
Jul 9, 2026
Merged

Requirements: observations are a fact layer (fix E3 bullet + temporal-split paragraph)#43
fazpu merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/requirements-observations

Conversation

@fazpu

@fazpu fazpu commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Fixes the two requirements inconsistencies found while authoring the implementation evals (#42):

  1. §Plane E, E3 bullet was relations-only — predates D43 (observations as a canonical fact layer) and D59 (stance observations). Now names both fact layers, both bi-temporal, both units of supersession/contradiction, with the graph-projection distinction.
  2. §Retrieval temporal-split paragraph said current-fact validity "lives only on relations" — contradicting D43 and D49 (current-fact answers assemble from validity-filtered relations and observations). Now says "the fact layers — relations and observations," renames the split claim/fact, and adds D43/D49 to the citations.

Follow-up on #42 after this merges: mark its questions.md §5 entries (#30/#31) resolved.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…he temporal-split paragraph

Two stale spots predating D43/D49/D59 (found while authoring the
implementation evals, PR #42):

- §Plane E, E3 bullet: was relations-only; now names both fact layers
  (relations = entity→entity; observations = entity-anchored
  value/statement facts incl. attributed stances), both bi-temporal,
  both units of supersession/contradiction; only relations project to
  the graph.
- §Retrieval temporal-split paragraph: "current-fact validity lives
  only on relations" → "on the fact layers — relations and
  observations"; claim/relation split renamed claim/fact split;
  citations extended with D43/D49.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Coverage report

This PR does not seem to contain any modification to coverable code.

@fazpu fazpu merged commit 62e0135 into main Jul 9, 2026
3 checks passed
fazpu added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 9, 2026
…D64 (seed core) in the predicate check + README range

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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