AI Research OS Workshop reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and evidence agreement

All four reports use the revision and run identity fixed by boundary. They characterize a host-mediated research-memory plugin, not an enclosing model runtime. The Source register supplies implementation and doctrine/design, but no observed-run or causal-experiment evidence. Additional specialist inspection at that pin extends the initially inspected scope; it does not change the source identity. Workflow selects the existing-directory web append path already carried by RT-RTE-append-ingest, rather than joining separate skills into an exercised workflow.

Duplicate supersessions

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-source-pages is superseded by MEM-OBJ-source-pages. Both declare the same retained wiki/sources/<slug>.md source-page content, model authoring from raw, and downstream writer/query interpretation. Their source-writer passages establish the same consumer boundary and conditional continuation beyond 2000 lines. The epistemic inventory and source-page transformation findings concern this same object; the supersession changes neither their fidelity uncertainty nor their evidence layer.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-synthesis is superseded by MEM-OBJ-synthesis. Both refer to the retained wiki/synthesis.md thesis, assumptions, supporting moves, counter-evidence and revision conditions, with the same summary-writer read budget. The epistemic thesis/confidence assessment and runtime theory account continue to concern this content. Neither report establishes a produced accepted thesis or exercised revision.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-repo-specs is superseded by MEM-OBJ-repo-specifications. Both declare curated architecture/module Markdown intended for wiki/repos/, with commit/path lineage and model interpretation via an architecture hub. Both inherit the destination and cache limitations of RT-RTE-github-ingest. The epistemic candidate-explanation finding therefore concerns the same retained specifications, not the cloned code itself.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-research-appendix is superseded by MEM-OBJ-research-appendix. Both denote the exported research.md beside a supplied writing corpus, with compact claims/quotes, exact pointers and a documented later writer consumer. Their identity evidence is the supplied distill route and its corpus-relative selection passage. The supersession does not convert intended condensation into verified semantic preservation or documented delivery into observed use.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-comparison-write is superseded by MEM-RTE-comparison-writing. Both declare the dedicated comparison writer: two subject pages, shared/exclusive backing-page reads, missing-subject or thin-support refusal, body-identity noop, KEEP-preserving write, and JSON return. Both cite the same refusal threshold and retain claimed design, afforded implementation and uninspected operation. The epistemic ledger's distinct generation, support checking and disposition functions remain assessments of this route; supersession supplies no missing dispatch or truth acceptance.

Containers, parts and ruled-out identities

The following overlaps do not establish whole-record identity. Their existing findings need not be replaced merely because another member declares a part.

• EPI-OBJ-raw is a raw-layer container spanning MEM-OBJ-raw-documents, MEM-OBJ-key-highlights and MEM-OBJ-raw-assets. Text imports, manually curated excerpts and visual payloads have different lineage and consumers. None alone replaces the container; no split supersession is asserted.
• EPI-OBJ-index spans MEM-OBJ-index-metadata, MEM-OBJ-index-summary and MEM-OBJ-index-md. Symbolic selection fields, interpreted summary strings and separately refreshed navigation are not interchangeable. The container explicitly distinguishes their inputs; no whole-record identity or split supersession is asserted.
• EPI-OBJ-topic-pages overlaps MEM-OBJ-wiki-pages, but the latter also includes comparisons. EPI-OBJ-comparison is the dedicated comparison-page part of that broader memory object, not identical to its entity/concept/overview content or to the comparison-writing route. Neither overlap warrants superseding a whole record.
• EPI-OBJ-query-content spans immediate answers, intended knowledge-document updates and saved pointers. MEM-OBJ-question-pages covers only the thin pointers; knowledge updates can instead affect wiki pages or repository specifications. Whole-record identity is ruled out. An answer route is not the retained object it may modify.
• EPI-OBJ-render-content spans prose, Canvas display and chart presentation. MEM-OBJ-render-prose, MEM-OBJ-canvas and the PNG part of MEM-OBJ-chart-script overlap those outputs. EPI-OBJ-chart-program covers the generated Python part of the last memory object, not its PNG. No one of these records replaces the whole render container or whole program/PNG pair.
• EPI-OBJ-lint-findings spans transient structural diagnostics and semantic reports/rolling content. MEM-OBJ-contradictions, MEM-OBJ-open-questions and the temporary-diagnostics portion of MEM-OBJ-log cover different portions, not the whole object. The operation log is not itself the diagnostic judgment.
• EPI-RTE-lint-mechanical explicitly declares itself part of RT-RTE-lint-maintenance. It does not replace semantic judges or driver coordination. Memory's direct mechanical-check findings annotate that supplied route rather than declare another mechanical route.

The memory output objects are distinct from RT-OBJ-skill-instructions and RT-OBJ-python-helpers. Generated chart programs are not shipped helper source. Likewise MEM-BAP-retained-knowledge and MEM-BAP-keep-preservation concern accumulated knowledge and user overrides, respectively, not the static instruction channel of RT-BAP-skill-guidance. Executing chart programs remains on RT-BAP-helper-execution. No identity is asserted among these authority paths or between them and their content objects. Workflow declares no additional records to supersede; epistemic claims concern attribution, confidence and repair advice rather than duplicate runtime policy claims.

Integration dispositions and independent convergence

Catalog counts and history. Memory's annotation on index building and integration issues add that YAML construction emits current rounds but not ingest history, and Markdown regeneration does not refresh YAML page counts or enumerate wiki/notes/. These additions qualify downstream expectations in RT-RTE-index-build, RT-RTE-query-answer and RT-RTE-render-output; none of those supplied records asserts that navigation generation implements a canonical count update. This is an added implementation limit, not a disagreement between analysts. Chart history-based data selection and automatic live-count refresh remain unestablished.

Comparison dispatch. The two superseded/retained comparison route declarations independently agree on writer affordance and missing integrated dispatch. EPI-CLM-comparison-repair additionally identifies lint's recommended comparison command versus render's four-format dispatch. Memory reports the same mismatch. No report treats writer existence as evidence that the recommended command works; this source-level seam is not a cross-report conflict.

Query landing. RT-CLM-query-safety, RT-RTE-query-answer, memory's saved-pointer findings and the epistemic save-disposition overlay preserve the same conflict inside the source instructions: Q.5 proposes wider knowledge-document writes while the authoritative map permits question-page addition. Memory adds the navigation omission for wiki/notes/. No analyst establishes compliant actual landing. Their agreement on an unresolved source recipe is not disagreement between reports.

Raw and acquisition alternatives. RT-CLM-raw-policy already distinguishes post-ingest policy from byte preservation and direct builder/helper effects. Memory adds PDF image-collision deletion and the NLM error-sentinel recipe in MEM-OBJ-raw-assets and MEM-OBJ-raw-documents. These witnesses extend the alternate-path limit without contradicting the runtime policy finding or establishing observed contamination.

Accumulation and maintenance coverage. Memory and workflow independently identify current-run mention aggregation and conditional raw continuation on RT-RTE-append-ingest. Memory and epistemic independently inspect the link-only missing-hub predicate and source-writer prohibition on new dangling hub links. Their findings qualify comprehensive integration and repair, not source retention itself. The runtime's uninspected resolver semantics are supplemented by specialist reads in EPI-RTE-lint-mechanical and memory's maintenance annotation. Different inspection coverage is not a conflicting result.

Handoff and delivery. Workflow's annotations add the builder's relative-URI return versus the driver's required absolute raw path, and the lack of explicit failed-seed filtering before catalog normalization. These extend the raw-URI augmentation seam already retained by runtime and memory. Workflow distinguishes writer dispatch, catalog row admission and operator delivery; RT-RTE-index-build likewise does not verify pointer existence or fetch success. No record asserts end-to-end successful delivery that these additions would contradict. Pre-refresh summary reads, GitHub copy/cache limits and same-path render noop are also retained without promotion to observed failures.

Warrant and theory properties. The epistemic overlay's doctrine only model-content functions do not contradict runtime/memory's afforded prompt workflows; they use different status vocabularies and separate helper implementation from requested model behavior. All distinguish retention/admission from truth acceptance and implemented structural checks from external-topic warrant. The afforded theory conditions in RT-RTE-append-ingest and RT-RTE-lint-maintenance are not strengthened by memory's retained-reason chains or workflow's delivery trace. Missing run evidence, improved capacity, own-method reflection and exercised autonomy/self-improvement remain separately bounded conclusions.

Required-part issue

Unresolved conflict: EPI-OBJ-lint-findings, MEM-OBJ-log, MEM-OBJ-contradictions and MEM-OBJ-open-questions leave structural diagnostic outputs and report-only stale-claim judgments without separate operative-object declarations. The epistemic object expressly distinguishes symbolic structural JSON from interpreted semantic judgments, with different checking domains and retention; its mechanical ledger separates four predicates, while memory's log container also spans durable operation summaries and temporary findings. Rolling contradiction/question objects cover only some semantic outputs. Thus the existing declarations cannot alone provide separate record identities for the structural-diagnostic and stale-flag parts. This prevents a fully part-addressed account of their distinct evaluators, retention and consumers; it does not settle either report's substantive findings or justify superseding the whole lint container by its rolling-file parts.

No other conflicting analyst finding or invalidated cross-report dependency was established from these supplied members. No correction-answer or declined-objection input was supplied. This reconciliation uses the pinned members only and makes no additional frozen-source reads.