MemPalace reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Boundary and reconciliation basis

The reports share the run and revision fixed by boundary and its SRC-1 Source register. Whole-system scope includes shipped consumers, instructions, maintenance and evaluators; it does not mean every implementation was inspected. The analysts distinguish implementation and doctrine from observed operation. Missing host traces, provider internals, dataset inspection and causal experiments prevent different conclusions, not competing boundary identities.

The supplied reports were reconciled afresh, including memory's corrected temporal finding. No separate correction answers or declined objections were supplied. No source checkout reads were needed; the cited records supply the evidence passages for the connections below.

Duplicate identities

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-drawer-content is superseded by MEM-OBJ-drawer-text. Both identify backend drawer documents text, including imported conversation/project content and physical chunks, for later human or agent interpretation. The epistemic declaration's write-handler/chunking evidence and the memory declaration's filing passage concern the same payload. This connects the epistemic inventory, checkpoint and revision findings to the memory text account. Metadata, vectors and closet locators remain separate operative parts; diary entries remain a specialization rather than another identity for the entire text object.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-kg-triple is superseded by MEM-OBJ-kg-triples. Both identify SQLite temporal relationship rows with subject/predicate/object, validity, confidence and optional provenance. Their retained field passages establish the same triple payload. Memory also names associated entities as context, not a separate identity for those relationship rows. The amendment connects the epistemic inventory and ledger to the memory object without equating fixed interval interpretation with warranted world-relation claims.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-kg-temporal is superseded by MEM-RTE-temporal-facts. Both trace caller assertions, interval endings and successor requests through KG handlers into temporal rows and later query responses. The handler, interval and query passages identify the same route, not different evaluators. This connects the epistemic retention/disposition rows and bounded conclusion to the memory write/read-back chain. It does not replace analyst-owned findings or statuses. The epistemic record retains its MCP-dispatch containment and its incomplete inspection of the supersede transaction and query SQL; the corrected memory record retains its branch-specific visibility limit.

Temporal correction and dependent findings

MEM-RTE-temporal-facts now distinguishes a newly inserted successor from reuse of an already-open successor. Its retained implementation passage returns an existing ID without aligning valid_from; the query passage checks both interval bounds. Memory therefore no longer asserts unconditional successor visibility at the requested replacement instant. It retains transactional old-row closure and successor insertion-or-reuse, historical withdrawal, and the implementation counterexample where a later-starting reused successor leaves neither row eligible at that instant. This is not an observed execution.

EPI-RTE-kg-temporal says supersede requests a shared boundary, while expressly leaving the complete transaction/as-of guarantee uninspected. Its ledger and bounded conclusion require temporal maintenance and grouping, not unconditional boundary visibility. Those findings do not depend on the memory assertion that was withdrawn. The corrected memory account and epistemic uncertainty therefore do not constitute a cross-report disagreement. Neither the identity amendment nor memory's fuller inspection upgrades the epistemic report's own inspection status. The handler's unconditional intent and memory's branch counterexample are a source-internal qualification retained by memory, not competing analyst guarantees.

Containers, parts and non-identical overlaps

MEM-RTE-wake-context and EPI-RTE-relevance-tags are distinct declared parts of RT-RTE-palace-recall. Startup selects identity and recent/weighted snippets; light enrichment computes transient relevance and recency annotations after search. Different triggers, selectors and products rule out identity. The runtime container already includes startup alternates and light enrichment; separating these parts does not invalidate it or require a split supersession.

EPI-RTE-duplicate-check, EPI-RTE-checkpoint-disposition and EPI-RTE-drawer-revision are distinct declared parts of RT-RTE-mcp-dispatch. Diagnostic production, check-consuming skip/add, and explicit replacement/deletion have different functions and effects. Dispatch remains their valid container. The temporal-route amendment likewise does not replace dispatch.

EPI-RTE-checkpoint-disposition overlaps the batch branch of MEM-RTE-diary-checkpoint, not its whole referent. Memory also covers deterministic hook prefixes, prompted summaries, daily-file import and continuity reads. The batch passages agree on duplicate skips and filing on dedup errors. Check and disposition remain separate; no supersession is warranted.

EPI-RTE-drawer-revision overlaps explicit update/delete in MEM-RTE-memory-maintenance. The latter also includes source deletion, CLI sync and audit-guided operations. Their closet-purge passages converge without establishing identical route boundaries. EPI-RTE-palace-audit isolates report production and optional threshold-to-exit consumption, not the broader withdrawal route. These records remain distinct.

MEM-RTE-source-filing includes mining downstream of RT-RTE-hook-ingest, plus independent project, general-extraction and sweep entries. Hook submission and downstream transformation/persistence are connected stages, not interchangeable referents. RT-RTE-hermes-capture has its own queue and callback admission. Diary checkpoint and transcript ingest can share a lifecycle trigger while retaining different content. None requires identity supersession.

MEM-RTE-media-index adds an asset write/read chain distinct from general recall. MEM-OBJ-media-asset, MEM-OBJ-drawer-vectors and RT-CMP-embeddinggemma2 respectively identify reference/descriptor, derived numerical data and model component. Likewise MEM-OBJ-closet-lines and MEM-RTE-closet-regeneration are locator product and production route, not the recall consumer. MEM-CMP-closet-provider and RT-CMP-llm-provider have distinct configured callers and products even if an installation chooses the same external service.

EPI-RTE-tunnel-maintenance adds proposal review/application/pruning beside MEM-OBJ-tunnels and MEM-RTE-tunnel-traversal. Proposal admission and trace-fed traversal counters differ in trigger, control and update. Epistemic inspection of CLI orchestration does not contradict memory's incomplete inspection of the full maintenance policy. Both preserve limits on inferred associations and downstream benefit.

Independent convergence and integration dispositions

RT-CLM-recall-protocol declares a search-and-exact-quotation policy, not universal raw-input preservation. Runtime queue drops and search truncation, memory normalization and checkpoint omissions, and epistemic near-duplicate rejection independently limit stronger complete-verbatim interpretations. MEM-RTE-source-filing, MEM-RTE-diary-checkpoint and EPI-RTE-checkpoint-disposition complement rather than contradict that narrower policy.

The stale PalaceContext prose identified in memory integration issues is qualified there by executable adapter construction. Runtime does not require adapter use to be merely hypothetical. Other memory issues preserve graph-policy, fidelity, withdrawal and alternative-surface limits; available but incompletely inspected paths are not absent or access gaps.

RT-CLM-readonly-boundary, RT-RTE-mcp-dispatch and the epistemic claim comparison agree on a protocol-level request refusal, not universal disk immutability or truth endorsement. Automatic capture and direct maintenance do not inherit every MCP gate. Software admission, human-review doctrine and unresolved caller authorship remain separate.

The workflow extends runtime coordination rather than contradicting it. WF-RTE-task-create produces RT-OBJ-task-request; RT-RTE-task-launch is optional controlled execution, not the portable default. WF-RTE-event-ack appends a linked response, not an exclusive execution lock. These routes have no identical runtime counterpart. WF-CLM-review-closure supplies requester review/application doctrine downstream of RT-RTE-patch-delivery, not a built-in acceptance gate. Memory task/patch annotations and epistemic proposal limits remain compatible. Stored readiness and reported closure do not prove application or passing verification; outcome-drawer filing remains prescribed rather than automatic.

EPI-RTE-retrieval-evaluation declares a metric/report route mentioned but not declared in runtime. EPI-CLM-benchmark-recall attributes numerical claims distinct from recall doctrine. Memory's raw-build and ranking-fill observations concern evaluator inputs; epistemic metric and report findings concern evaluation and consumption. Neither establishes reproduced results, live-loop answer acceptance or component causation.

No cross-report disagreement requiring an Unresolved conflict: paragraph is established by these supplied versions. The amendments retain both declarations and their analyst-owned limits; other overlaps are valid containers, parts or connected distinct mechanisms. No missing required part was identified. Uncertainty about source truth, uninspected alternatives, host compliance, exercised reliance and benefit stays local to the reports rather than becoming a system-wide absence or verdict.