llmwiki-marimo reconciliation

Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-reconciliation-report.md

Reconciliation

Evidence boundary and shared referents

All four reports use the same frozen revision and the implementation/doctrine evidence registered in the boundary Source register. None supplies observed operation or a causal comparison. The epistemic ledger's implemented architectural status does not upgrade the routes' operation conclusion status from uninspected. No source reads were needed for this reconciliation; the cited analyst records supply the evidence passages.

The workflow declares no new records. Its save annotation concerns the same RT-RTE-chat-save that memory annotates and epistemic separates by function. Those discussions are not additional identities requiring supersession. Likewise, the epistemic ledger's repeated citations of ingestion, chat and save routes separate functions of the declared routes, not competing route declarations.

Object identity dispositions

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-dataset-rows is superseded by MEM-OBJ-datasets. Both identify the structured data in datasets/<categoria>.md consumed through LocalMarkdownSource, including parsed rows and category/frontmatter structure. Both retain the same query-time reparsing mechanism and the same rows = self._rows_for_file(path) / key-filter passage from SRC-1, base/domain/datasets/source.py. The file representation and transient normalized representation describe this same dataset operand, not competing dataset stores. This identity connects the epistemic finance checks and derivation to the memory report's retained input. It does not replace either report's fields: external provenance, parser inspection limits and the distinction between structural suitability and source truth remain as stated. Both IDs remain declared and their existing citations remain valid.

Exact identity is ruled out between MEM-OBJ-source-text and EPI-OBJ-source-text. The former includes original source files and extraction cache as well as indexed extracted text; the latter identifies extracted document_pages, source rows and chunks. They overlap at the extracted evidence consumed by generation, retrieval and verification. The original binary/file and cache parts prevent treating their entire referents as identical. The broader memory container remains valid; neither it nor the extracted-text record requires supersession.

Exact identity is also ruled out between the whole referents of MEM-OBJ-wiki-pages and EPI-OBJ-wiki-pages. Both cover retained summary/concept/overview and saved-chat prose and cite its later merge consumers. Memory additionally inventories collection index/log files; epistemic describes the prose together with its SQLite content/chunk/reference representation. Their shared prose is independent convergence, but their full declared scopes are not interchangeable. MEM-OBJ-document-chunks separately preserves access metadata and rebuild losses; it is not identical to either prose object. No split supersession is needed: these containers' findings do not become wrong when the operative parts are distinguished.

MEM-OBJ-page-verifications is the persisted portion of EPI-OBJ-verification-report, not an exact duplicate of its full referent. Epistemic includes transient answer/draft reports as well as stored page diagnostics. Both describe stored probabilities, hashes and bounded evidence excerpts, with current-threshold reclassification rather than a permanently stored sentence verdict. Neither object is identical to the score-producing RT-CMP-local-nli-verifier. The valid combined report object can remain alongside its stored part; no supersession is warranted.

The other object identities are ruled out. MEM-OBJ-aliases-generated is retained control state, not the RT-RTE-configure-grants operation that changes or loads it. MEM-OBJ-spans and MEM-OBJ-index-snapshots are inspection and recovery inputs, not chat output or evaluator routes. EPI-OBJ-chat-answer, EPI-OBJ-lint-issues and EPI-OBJ-advisory-result distinguish response text, diagnostic candidates/notes and computed advice. A note can become page content, and a table can become answer text, without making each object's complete lifecycle identical to the receiving container.

Route containment and functional overlap

MEM-RTE-source-withdrawal and MEM-RTE-page-verification explicitly remain parts of RT-RTE-wiki-maintenance. The parent remains a valid broader route; neither part supersedes it. Withdrawal removes source access and one-to-one summaries while leaving other citing pages stale and searchable. This refines maintenance without contradicting its stated limits. No other declared route has the same withdrawal progression.

Exact identity is ruled out between the complete MEM-RTE-page-verification chain and each of EPI-RTE-verify-check, EPI-RTE-verify-store and EPI-RTE-verify-use. Memory traces page-context resolution, scoring, replacement and later reading-screen consumption. Epistemic separates computation, persistence and consequential diagnostic use; its computation/use routes also cover answer or draft verification outside that page-only chain. Storage is a shared suboperation, not identity of the full chains. The memory container remains valid, so a split supersession would be unwarranted. Together the records distinguish diagnostic retention from acceptance of page truth and from a universal retrieval/save veto.

EPI-RTE-contradiction-check, EPI-RTE-contradiction-note, EPI-RTE-gap-check and EPI-RTE-gap-note declare separate maintenance parts. Their evaluators and effects differ: model diagnoses precede deterministic warning/reminder mutations. Memory's maintenance annotation describes these same mechanisms without declaring duplicate routes. A warning's retention is not adjudication, and replacement of a TODO by a related-page link is not demonstrated acceptance that the gap is semantically resolved.

EPI-RTE-finance-check, EPI-RTE-finance-select and EPI-RTE-finance-derive are not duplicates of configure-grants or the chat routes. Validation is reused at composition and invocation; instrument selection and arithmetic occur during advice. The conditional arithmetic conclusion is distinct from validating source authenticity or future returns. EPI-RTE-answer-format is a shared deterministic postprocessor used by buffered answer routes, not identical to those routes. Its marker-dependent table append does not strengthen the grounding predicate.

EPI-RTE-eval-packet, EPI-RTE-corpus-freeze and RT-RTE-model-evaluation have different products and consumers: external-judge material, developer fixtures and suitability grades. None supersedes another. Epistemic's installer-continuation finding qualifies the grades' advisory force without contradicting runtime's operator/installer decision account.

Independent convergence and integration issues

The reports converge on mode-specific grounding. RT-RTE-strict-chat tests substantive tool-return presence; RT-RTE-preretrieval-chat has branch-specific context and lexical checks; RT-RTE-streaming-chat emits without the strict final substitution. Memory's annotations and the epistemic ledger preserve these distinctions, and the workflow account does not extend buffered guarantees to streaming. The EPI-CLM-grounding-mandate is a source-native demand, not a conflicting analyst assertion of guaranteed entailment.

The same convergence holds for save admission. Runtime, memory, epistemic and workflow distinguish normal web editing/cancel opportunity from marimo/convenience drafting-and-writing without intermediate review. The endpoint does not enforce draft provenance or verifier success. RT-CLM-readonly-chat concerns standard tool grants, not all persistence services or arbitrary factory extra_tools. No identity exists between that claim and the epistemic compilation, grounding, maintenance or finance claims: those address different operations and warrants.

Workflow adds that a Git commit is attempted but optional, and that a failed save can retain editor text without rolling back prior filesystem effects. These refine RT-RTE-chat-save, whose write/reference/repair caveats already reject an all-artifact transaction. They do not conflict with ingestion's distinct compensating recovery or maintenance's separate forward-restoration route.

All issues in memory's integration section remain bounded qualifications, not factual corrections of runtime. Withdrawal and diagnostic distinctions are connected above. Alias regeneration has a no-candidate early return, and cached grants have a different refresh horizon from parse-on-query data. Neither memory nor runtime establishes immediate refresh across all callers. Snapshot and reindex alternatives retain different metadata fidelity; runtime does not claim universal lossless reconstruction. Caller-held history, reduced model history, optional trace payloads and saved pages remain separate artifacts, not interchangeable persistence guarantees.

No unresolved cross-report disagreement is established by these pinned members. No correction-answer or declined-objection input was supplied. No required missing part is identified that would invalidate the retained containers. Local uninspected parser, verification-selection, repair, evaluator and recovery details remain limitations rather than system-complete negatives. The reports' common distinction between delivery, activation and benefit prevents inferring learning, completed theory-building or exercised self-improvement from retained prose, diagnostics or configuration changes alone. This reconciliation does not judge those findings' support or upgrade their statuses.