Deterministic note-to-ingest claim checking

Type: ../../types/design-proposal.md

Archived (see archive README). Retired by the 2026-08-25 revision of ADR 073. The live design now checks a note directly against retained verbatim quotes or a declared checksum-verified snapshot. What remains here is the measured pre-migration state.

Current state (as of 2026-08-24)

• The virtual source review lens had recorded 33 (artifact, ingest) pairs, all with a pass outcome. It compared note wording with the ingest's paraphrased Claims entries rather than directly with source text.
• The grounding instruction asked writers to prefer the exact normalized Claim (paraphrase) wording. Only 4 of 65 measured note-to-ingest pairs did so. The other 61 paraphrased the paraphrase, leaving no shared string for a deterministic check.
• The corpus contained 119 Claims entries with 374 exact source extracts. The revision retained the extracts and removed the interpreted Claim, Scope, Confidence, and Limitation fields.
• The universal verbatim-citation validator found one use across 1,264 files. Fifty-five source-citing notes contained long quotations, but only three distinct quoted spans occurred in the ingest they cited. Requiring existing note prose to quote its ingest would therefore have been a corpus-wide prose convention rather than a mechanical activation of established practice.
• The first grounded cohorts had five false extracts before deterministic extract verification was added. Four silently repaired capture artifacts: a line-break hyphenation, an inline footnote marker, or a LaTeX arrow. This measurement is why quote-to-snapshot verification remains mechanical even though note-to-source alignment remains semantic.