Research Round 48 · 2026-11-06
Extract First, or Brief First?
Research question
Does a condition level discharge field release correctly read cures without weakening schedule threshold protection, and does extract first independent review reduce brief anchoring?
Summary
Builds on Round 47 by separating cure discharge from record supersession, requiring the independent reviewer to extract and provisionally decide before seeing any brief, and adding clinical protocol amendment packets outside contracts and SEC exhibits. On gold ledgers, R48 releases all five Domain A cures and all four Domain B cures that R47 holds, while retaining zero unsafe releases under scripted schedule threshold mistakes. On Witness C live Domain A ledgers, R47 and R48 are identical at 14 of 20. Extract first provisional matches packet only at 18 of 20; after the brief, accuracy falls to 14 of 20 against 12 for packet and brief without prior extraction. On Domain B, packet only is 16 of 16 and extract first ends at 14 of 16. Live exhibit note following is zero. Fifteen Witness B ledgers and the synthesis call, stopped at the budget boundary in the first run, were completed the same day as a disclosed post hoc completion; on all 20 Witness B ledgers discharge improves correct open outcomes from 12 to 15 with no unsafe release.
Major findings
- F48.1 (deterministic, E48-A): R48 releases all five Domain A and all four Domain B gold cures that R47 holds, with zero unsafe releases under scripted M2.
- F48.3 (live, E48-B): On Witness C live Domain A ledgers, R47 and R48 are identical at 14 of 20 with 0 unsafe. On all 20 Witness B ledgers (15 completed post hoc), R48 improves correct open outcomes from 12 to 15 without an unsafe release.
- F48.4 (live, E48-B): Extract first provisional matches packet only at 18 of 20. V4 final is 14 of 20 against V3 at 12 of 20. Wrong resolver holds followed: V1 0, V3 4, V4 final 2.
- F48.5 (live, E48-D): On Domain B clinical packets, V1 is 16 of 16 and V4 final is 14 of 16.
- F48.6 (live, E48-B): All routing compositions escape zero unsafe outcomes. C1 with R48 and C1 with R47 both escape zero.
- F48.7 (live, E48-C): Live note following is zero on 24 exhibits. Ten CERTIFY exhibits become false holds.
Experiments
- E48-A Structural diagnostic for discharge versus supersession Complete
- E48-B Domain A live discharge, routing, and extract first review Complete with disclosed post hoc completion
- E48-C Public exhibit validators on 24 new filings Complete
- E48-D Domain B clinical protocol packets Complete
Hypotheses
- H48.1 R48 releases cures that R47 holds on gold ledgers, with no added unsafe release under scripted M2.
- H48.2 R48 still removes the scripted schedule threshold release.
- H48.3 Extract first then brief (V4 final) is at least as accurate as packet only (V1) and follows wrong resolver holds less often than V3.
- H48.4 On Domain B, extract first (V4) is at least as accurate as packet only (V1).
- H48.5 C1 with R48 escapes no more unsafe releases than C1 with R47.
- H48.6 The validator follows a note on at least one HOLD exhibit and the gate routes every such release.
Architecture implications
Research diagnostic and live benchmark only. Recommends separating condition discharge from record supersession and requiring extract first commitment before a reviewer sees a disagreement brief. No production system, release gate, or Noetis behavior changed.
Open questions
- Can an extract first provisional commitment be stored and reused so later brief exposure revises it only when the brief cites new packet spans?
- Do matched density Domain B briefs change whether extract first revises toward or away from packet only accuracy?
Connected research
Builds on Round 47, Round 46, Round 45. Continued in Round 49.
Read the published paper ↗Full experimental notes, prompts, internal architecture details and implementation procedures are kept by Encevra SI Research Labs.
