Enoch reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

All four reports use the revision and evidence layers in the boundary's Source register. Their additional source inspection extends coverage within SRC-1, not the evidence boundary. Implementation findings do not supply observed operation or causal benefit. No correction answers or declined objections were supplied to this reconciliation. No source files were read for it.

Duplicate identities

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-evidence-signal is superseded by MEM-OBJ-evidence-signals. Both identify EvidenceSignal observations and their symbolic references/confidence/status in evidence.jsonl, produced by extraction and consumed by synthesis. Their cited SRC-1 src/enoch/evolution/evidence.py passages concern the same known-reference check. The epistemic inventory and scan ledger concern this same object; supersession does not turn reference validity into observation truth.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-semantic-curation is superseded by MEM-OBJ-semantic-curation. Both identify SemanticCuration recommendations, removal classifications/reasons and evidence references retained in curation JSONL. SRC-1 src/enoch/evolution/curation.py and src/enoch/evolution/core.py, as cited in the records, connect retention to proposal selection and later removal lookup. The epistemic inventory and curation ledger retain their distinction between recommendation, suggestion and enforcing disposition; the identity amendment changes none of those findings.

Amendment: EPI-OBJ-learning-artifact is superseded by MEM-OBJ-learning-artifact. Both identify the LearningArtifact JSONL index and Markdown work record containing request, clipped result, skill paths and provenance. Their SRC-1 src/enoch/automatic_learning.py evidence describes the same skill-path predicate and artifact output. The epistemic inventory and recording route therefore concern the memory member's artifact, not an acquired executable skill or demonstrated improvement. The recorder/caller distinction remains below.

Amendment: EPI-RTE-skill-assessment is superseded by MEM-RTE-skill-assessment. Both trace the same chat learn progression: published snapshot loading, path/manifest checks, isolated model assessment, applicability/schema/scope admission, candidate persistence and later ordinary approval/work. Both distinguish admin metadata display from chat assessment. Their SRC-1 src/enoch/learn.py, src/enoch/app/core.py and src/enoch/evolution/core.py evidence identifies the same producer, checks and consumers. The epistemic ledger separates acquisition from assessment and disposition within this route; its content-relation findings remain attached to those functions, rather than being replaced by a single route-wide classification. Both records retain wired implementation and uninspected operation.

Containers, parts and distinct progressions

The following overlaps do not establish duplicate identities and require no supersession:

Independent convergence and integration dispositions

Admission and actor labels. The memory and epistemic members independently distinguish final-text memory authorship from explicit/high defaults, and human actor labels from authenticated approval. Their memory-store, removal and curation records converge with RT-RTE-chat-actions and RT-CLM-merge-authorization: handlers can admit model-issued commands, while semantic authorization remains prompt policy. This is not a disagreement with the scheduler stopping at a proposal. EPI-CLM-governed-evolution is the broader experience-to-change claim, not a duplicate of the narrower merge policy. EPI-CLM-validated-evidence names a synthesis-prompt description, not another admission guarantee.

Lineage unknown extended, not contradicted. The memory annotation on RT-RTE-lineage-adoption supplies the completed-task, landed-review and non-null revision predicates from SRC-1 src/enoch/lineage/lifecycle.py. Runtime and EPI-RTE-lineage-assessment retain their own local uninspected post-merge scope. Those local limits do not deny the additional inspected predicates. Stored adoption remains distinct from restarted use or parent-behavior equivalence; no conflict or status replacement follows.

History selection qualification. MEM-OBJ-task-events and MEM-RTE-evidence-update bound the scanner's complete-lifecycle language by the default 5,000-event reader in SRC-1 src/enoch/tasks/events.py. EPI-RTE-evidence-scan does not claim complete old histories. The qualification limits input completeness without withdrawing the implemented scan/synthesis chain.

Artifact success depends on the layer. MEM-OBJ-learning-artifact attributes creation to a successful-work callback; WF-RTE-review-handoff and the workflow account distinguish completed tasks, captures, publication and activation. EPI-RTE-learning-artifact says the recorder itself has no success predicate and leaves caller filtering unestablished by that function. Its failed-result countercase is function-local, not a claim that the shipped application necessarily calls it on a failed task. Both positions can stand. Neither establishes acquired skill, a wired descendant reader or future benefit.

Validation and delivery boundaries. Runtime task/update findings, the epistemic doctor record and workflow handoff converge on scoped executable checks, bounded repair and ordinary new-change publication admission. They also preserve stored-state resume and earlier alternate branches rather than asserting fresh doctor on every completion. Workflow adds remote-receipt and captured-copy predicates, staged recovery and terminal reporting. Review delivery, landing, checkout activation, restart and live receipt remain separate; none of these additions supersedes the task/update containers.

Context and recovery limits. Memory startup/session/activity records extend the runtime's two injection layers, selective task frames and Codex recovery. Workflow's narrower inspection of activity dispatch does not contradict memory's inspection of the sync helper. Native retention, compaction, exact budgets and later use remain opaque. Memory's migration annotation separates portable facts/identity from excluded native-session mappings and optional artifacts; runtime's incomplete import/verification coverage remains a limitation, not a contrary continuity guarantee.

Unresolved coverage is not a cross-report defect. The memory integration issues retain incomplete promotion producers, lineage discovery/invalidation, scheduled-context refresh, migration import/rollback and installed plugin consumers. The epistemic boundary additionally leaves broader semantic transformations unassessed. These limitations coexist with positive inspected routes and the boundary's whole-system functional scope. They prevent complete withdrawal, transfer, warrant and global human-control conclusions. They do not establish absent behavior, absent learning or absent internal model criticism. Runtime, memory and epistemic accounts all leave exercised own-body change and causal benefit unobserved while describing improvement-directed proposal/work/activation capacity.

No disagreement between the supplied reports requires an Unresolved conflict: paragraph. No supplied dependent finding requires a peer record to say something its current version denies. The supersessions above state duplicate identity only; all other comparisons retain valid containers, distinct parts, separate evidence horizons or faithfully scoped uncertainty.