AutoSci reconciliation

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

Reconciliation

Scope and evidence

The reports share the boundary and Source register. SRC-1 supplies implementation and doctrine/design, not observed operation or causal experiments. This reconciliation uses only the supplied members and makes no source reads. No analyst correction answers or declined objections were supplied. The current runtime and workflow members contain correction findings; their consequences below follow their current text, not the previous reconciliation. Conclusion statuses and epistemic architectural statuses describe different units and layers; they are not ranked to select a joint status.

Identity dispositions

No identical cross-report referents requiring supersession were established. The following comparisons rule out supersession; valid containers remain alongside their parts.

Anchored disagreements

Unresolved conflict: RT-OBJ-context-brief and RT-RTE-knowledge-cycle are described in the runtime account as using a compiler that keeps experiment and stale-entity summaries, without explicitly restricting that list to selected purposes. MEM-RTE-context-compilation and the memory annotation on the brief state that general rebuild assigns both sections zero budget; memory explicitly requests qualification of the runtime description. The memory record supplies the SRC-1 tools/research_wiki.py budget passage, and the workflow account supplies the general-wrapper passage. Runtime already describes budgets and omissions, but does not explicitly settle this particular purpose distinction. This wording disagreement prevents a joint reading that an ordinary general brief necessarily includes experiments or stale entities. Neither report's status is substituted for the other's.

Unresolved conflict: the memory annotation on RT-RTE-parallel-ingest says paper-specific worktree/subagent inputs isolate the task and that committed artifacts escape while merged content persists. The corrected runtime record and workflow account and annotation now distinguish intended isolation from an unestablished payload handoff: SRC-1 .gitignore excludes generated raw/wiki/checkpoint files, while .claude/skills/init/references/parallel-ingest.md prescribes unforced staging, including ignored checkpoint paths. A relative source path does not deliver its payload; a nonempty commit or merge does not verify inclusion of new ignored wiki output. Memory's MEM-OBJ-checkpoints also calls committed worktree branches durable fan-in artifacts without carrying this payload qualification into its parallel annotation. The findings can coexist for files actually committed, but the memory annotation still relies on an unqualified delegated-input/return account that the supplied runtime no longer establishes. This prevents treating the joint account as establishing source visibility, generated-output transport or delivery merely from worktree creation and successful Git fan-in. It does not establish that no tracked content can persist, nor that every invocation fails.

Integration-issue dispositions and convergence

Scheduled retention is now a shared qualification, not the previous cross-report conflict. RT-RTE-daily-intake explicitly incorporates the memory annotation's SRC-1 .gitignore and .github/workflows/daily-arxiv.yml condition: unforced staging need not retain new ignored entities/graph/raw sources, though tracked index/log changes can persist. MEM-OBJ-wiki-pages distinguishes local storage from versioned retention. The epistemic ledger calls changes possible, not guaranteed. Wiring remains a distinct finding from payload inclusion, push success and later consumption. No report supplies a CI trace or deployed tracking override.

Initialization's corrected source contradiction is shared by runtime and workflow. RT-RTE-parallel-ingest and the workflow account now both retain the ignored-input/output staging problem, not merely unobserved host compliance. They also preserve the intended manifest order, parent-owned merges, empty-success-branch rejection, skipped known failures and stash recovery. Rebuild/lint can act only on available parent files; they do not supply missing transport. Workflow's initial-scan lint exit status adds a separate verification limit, consistent with EPI-RTE-wiki-check and EPI-RTE-wiki-repair: diagnostics and mutation are not a final semantic acceptance certificate. The remaining memory dependency discrepancy is retained above, rather than extending the corrected runtime guarantee back into memory.

Hiera experience is reporting, while replay supplies consequential state. MEM-OBJ-experience and EPI-RTE-hiera-summary independently report counts computed in memory, timestamp-bearing revision hashing, and status/finalize exposure of revision rather than the full dictionary. MEM-RTE-ledger-replay and EPI-RTE-hiera-select identify scores/bouts as continuation inputs. RT-RTE-hiera-search says ledger state feeds scheduling, summaries and counts; it does not assert that the experience digest drives scheduling. Boundary wording about derived experience does not establish that consumer either. The epistemic distinction between loop re-evaluation of an existing candidate and tune-generated config children adds detail where runtime left tuner policy incompletely inspected. This is not a disagreement or duplicate identity.

Freshness and withdrawal remain scoped limits. MEM-RTE-memory-maintenance, MEM-OBJ-edges, MEM-OBJ-checkpoints and the memory annotation on RT-RTE-knowledge-cycle retain nonuniform refresh, append-only enrichment and residual projected edges/root manifests/sidecars. Runtime promises neither universal dependency invalidation nor whole-memory erasure. The graph display, compiler ranks and stored page state remain different surfaces; no supersession or contrary guarantee follows from their differences.

Failure reasons and theory assessments operate at different granularities. MEM-RTE-negative-memory includes filter, pilot and formal failures with different evidential force. It retains the absence of a guaranteed full persisted terminal verdict or uniformly populated Lessons learned narrative, and the brief's loss of detailed rationale. RT-RTE-research-verdict and EPI-RTE-verdict-check separately assess localized hypotheses, requested content-dependent criticism and iteration; they do not depend on every compressed summary preserving a full argument. Their source-level conditions are not observed theory-building episodes, improved capacity, reflection on AutoSci or exercised self-improvement.

Review transport and scientific acceptance are separate. RT-RTE-review-call supplies advice and volatile thread history. EPI-CLM-verdict-certainty questions source doctrine about agreement and certainty, not a runtime finding of calibrated correctness. Verdict checking, disposition and integration retain separate authorities and limits; status changes through RT-RTE-browser-write do not authenticate an acceptance history. RT-CLM-sidecar-confirmation and the Hiera records likewise distinguish finite-score execution success from formal confirmation and report-only finalization from sandboxing.

Remaining uninspected conversion, regeneration, proposal/tuner, publication, translation and host-context paths are named coverage limits in the supplied reports, not inferred absences or additional disagreements. RT-CMP-claude-code and RT-CMP-review-llm separately preserve unresolved provider parameter/version behavior. No absence of run or causal evidence is used to erase the narrower implemented or afforded routes.