llmwiki reconciliation
Type: agentic-system-analyses/types/agentic-system-reconciliation-report.md
Reconciliation
Shared boundary and independent convergence
The four reports use the revision and source identity fixed by boundary. Their implementation and doctrine findings do not establish an observed save, later model compliance or task benefit. Differences in inspected scope remain local: memory inspects quiz scheduling and source-freshness acknowledgement where epistemic expressly leaves those implementations uninspected. Neither report's uncertainty contradicts the other's positive finding.
RT-RTE-warm-save, its memory and workflow annotations, and WF-CLM-closeout-completion converge on distinct milestones: exact-session enqueue, sequential extract issuance, range marking, and whole-close-out reporting. The completion claim is not another route and is not superseded. The event recorder's argument checks do not certify the preceding authored pages or final lint. Foreground routine admission is model judgment under policy; direction review is a separate human decision. The workflow's inline procedure and path-only scratchpad fallback agree with runtime's host-dependent context protocol, not an implemented worker scheduler.
RT-RTE-auto-update, the memory ingest annotation and the epistemic admission ledger agree that optional generation has different gates from foreground save. Arbitrary-file ingest extends acquisition without changing updateOne's publication identity. Separate WRITE/VERIFY calls do not establish separate model identities, as RT-CLM-independent-verify states. RT-CLM-tool-free concerns deployment guidance, not a spawn invariant. These claims are distinct from EPI-CLM-topic-safety, which concerns replacement of living topics.
Duplicate identities and containment
Amendment: EPI-OBJ-wiki-pages is superseded by MEM-OBJ-wiki-pages. Both identify project Markdown claim, topic and entry pages, not shipped writer policy; both retain the same SRC-1 src/engine/consolidate.ts passage identifying the living topic encyclopedia. Both describe symbolic metadata and distinguish rule consumption from ordinary reference prose. The separately declared rule part remains separately assessed below. This identity connection changes neither report's claims about fidelity or acceptance, and does not equate these products with RT-OBJ-save-skill.
Amendment: EPI-OBJ-quiz-record is superseded by MEM-OBJ-quiz-ledger. Both denote the per-person quiz ledger and session notebook in docs/wiki/6_quiz/, containing questions, human answers, grades and schedule markers for later human recall. Epistemic's SRC-1 skill/wiki-quiz.md passage establishes the human-only direction; memory adds scheduler inspection in src/engine/quiz.ts. Identity does not upgrade the epistemic report's doctrine-only assessment to implementation inspection, nor turn due-count cold-start metadata into model consumption of quiz answers.
Amendment: EPI-RTE-topic-merge is superseded by MEM-RTE-topic-merge. Both trace the same consolidate source increment, bounded topic context, added-claim VERIFY, full replacement, post-write lint and independent watermark. Their SRC-1 src/engine/consolidate.ts passages include the identical non-merge-only removal branch. Both retain the failed-merge rollback gap and do not warrant preservation of deleted old claims. The epistemic ledger's separate checking, disposition and integration functions remain distinctions within this route, not competing status choices.
No identity is asserted between EPI-OBJ-edit-rule and the whole MEM-OBJ-wiki-rules: the latter also includes recall phrases and targeting. Their overlapping rule text and glob predicates are the same operative part, supported by the identical SRC-1 src/engine/knowledge-policy.ts currency predicate. The epistemic rule declaration is already a part of its page container; neither it nor the memory extension is a duplicate of RT-RTE-edit-rules, which is the delivery/gating route.
The earlier missing recall-selection part is now MEM-OBJ-recall-triggers, explicitly part of MEM-OBJ-wiki-rules. Its SRC-1 src/engine/page-rank.ts passages show rule-plus-recall projection and lexical trigger matching; src/engine/turncontext.ts ranks before imperative withholding. This resolves the earlier partition issue without superseding the valid extension container or identifying it with the narrower EPI-OBJ-edit-rule. Retrieval-selection authority remains distinct from imperative delivery even when the same rule string supplies both consumers.
EPI-OBJ-review-report retains its combined advisory-report/gap-state identity and now declares EPI-OBJ-gap-task as a part. The latter owns task-state consumers and repeated-absence disposition in SRC-1 src/engine/gaps.ts; report import checks remain with the advisory product in src/engine/session-review.ts. The missing-part issue is resolved. Whole-object identity with MEM-OBJ-review-reports remains ruled out because memory covers the report/snapshot product, not the combined report/task object. Their advisory-report overlap requires no replacement of the valid container.
EPI-OBJ-feedback-receipts remains a valid container spanning usage/wrong judgments, rechecks, affinity aggregates and silver regression expectations. MEM-OBJ-usage-affinity and MEM-OBJ-work-feedback describe its distinct receipt/aggregate families and consumers, not two whole-object duplicates. SRC-1 src/engine/injected-feedback.ts consumes version-bound judgments for ranking/withholding; src/engine/work-feedback.ts replays authored required/forbidden fragments with affinity null. The epistemic declaration and ledger already distinguish those functions. Separation makes no actual combined finding wrong, so the previous split supersession is withdrawn. No amendment replaces the container. Its overlap with those memory objects preserves their findings, not a pooled authority or promotion of silver expectations to production ranking evidence. MEM-OBJ-emission-ledger is upstream path/digest evidence, not the judgments or replay cases themselves.
Overlapping routes without whole-route identity
MEM-RTE-feedback-fold spans judgment recording, aggregate production and later selector effects. EPI-RTE-feedback-recheck spans judgment recording and explicit wrong-resolution; EPI-RTE-affinity-update spans legacy/explicit aggregate production and reranking. Each overlaps the others, but endpoints and coverage differ, so no pair is superseded as an identical whole route. Explicit legacy refresh remains an available route; memory's SRC-1 src/engine/affinity.ts early-return passage rules out describing default daemon invocation as an active read-scan learner. Epistemic's partly inspected observer does not assert that default activation. Both preserve version-specific wrong markers, warning rather than universal removal of prose, and no demonstrated learning or exercised self-improvement.
MEM-RTE-freshness-recheck is not identical to the wrong-resolution route: it acknowledges page/dependency snapshots and clears stale_since in SRC-1 src/engine/source-freshness.ts. Wrong-resolution instead uses emitted judgments and explicit raw-evidence receipts in src/engine/reported-wrong.ts. Both validate identity/freshness rather than semantic entailment, but similar limitations do not establish common identity.
EPI-RTE-ask-quiz now explicitly retains a grouping of two procedures, not a pooled oracle or approval rule. Its ask procedure is the existing MEM-RTE-query-fileback; its quiz part is separately declared as EPI-RTE-human-quiz. SRC-1 skill/wiki-ask.md requires user approval before reusable answer filing; skill/wiki-quiz.md instead uses the page as a human answer key and sends grades to recall scheduling. The previous missing-quiz issue is resolved. No whole-route identity with ask alone is asserted, and no split supersession is needed: the corrected container explicitly preserves different targets and consumers, while the existing ask record and new quiz part own their respective fields.
EPI-RTE-maintenance-view now declares EPI-RTE-gap-disposition and EPI-RTE-navigation-view as its parts, with separate ledger rows. The former changes task selection through report omission/recurrence in SRC-1 src/engine/gaps.ts; the latter shapes entry/navigation through src/engine/overview.ts and src/engine/synthesis.ts. The corrected container describes alternatives, not a shared acceptance criterion or sequential workflow. This resolves the earlier missing-route-parts issue; the valid grouping remains without supersession. Neither producer is identical to RT-RTE-deep-maintenance's orchestration or RT-RTE-context-delivery's consumption.
EPI-RTE-distill-check is explicitly part of RT-RTE-deep-maintenance, not its replacement. Memory's deep annotation and EPI-CLM-distill-loss converge on the same narrow source-set/conflict-line check in SRC-1 src/engine/distill.ts; neither establishes full semantic preservation. EPI-RTE-mechanical-check is a shared checker across writers, not identical to a complete publication route. EPI-RTE-semantic-review produces/imports advisory reports, not the broad deep procedure or its report object. EPI-RTE-feedback-replay is the checking consumer of the memory work-feedback object, not that object. EPI-RTE-reflection-receipt is a distinct hash-bound range-marking path, not the sequential issuance mechanism of warm save. MEM-RTE-tier-cleanup is a reversible tier mutation with hash-bound review, not semantic acceptance or deep orchestration. No supersession is asserted for these distinct referents.
Remaining integration dispositions
Memory's Integration issues refine rather than contradict the runtime baseline. MEM-OBJ-capture-state distinguishes lost tombstones from expiring owned export bodies; runtime's mention of pruning is not a universal deletion claim. MEM-OBJ-wiki-index qualifies the source schema's all-derived language with transcript registrations and freshness receipts; no supplied report asserts complete reconstruction from Markdown alone. The topic recovery limit is independently convergent across the superseded topic records and must not be generalized from distill's different snapshot protocol.
MEM-OBJ-review-reports's partial legacy-publication coverage and epistemic's fuller review implementation inspection are not conflicting claims about operation. Both deny that writing a report establishes applied correction. Likewise RT-BAP-wiki-context, the memory context annotation and epistemic ledger agree on selective reference supply, stricter rule eligibility, pointer-only exceptions and external host window control. None establishes a universal truth filter or reliable obedience.
The supplied refusal's feedback-container blocker is corrected by withdrawing the unsupported split amendment, not by changing either analyst's findings. The currently pinned memory and epistemic reports supply the previously missing recall, gap-task, quiz and maintenance-route parts; the corresponding former partition conflicts no longer apply. No analyst answer files or declined cross-report objections were supplied. No remaining disagreement between these reports is established by the comparisons above; differences in coverage remain limits rather than conflicts.
The alternate-channel limit remains explicit in memory's Integration issues and epistemic's coverage account: RT-RTE-context-delivery names commit and absence channels, but the specialists do not independently inventory their retained parts or evaluator domains in SRC-1 src/engine/commit-context.ts and src/engine/absent-subject.ts. Complete read-back-source and negative-claim-evaluator coverage is therefore withheld. Not all per-turn content derives from accepted wiki pages; no result here warrants that a subject never occurred in the project's full history. This limit neither withdraws the supported wiki/rule routes nor supplies missing records.
No source files were read to resolve ambiguities: this reconciliation uses only the pinned members and their retained evidence passages. It does not adjudicate analyst support or change a declaring report.