RP005A — Package interpretation and disposition review

Date: 2026-10-11. Explicit internal post-outcome review of the finite Cycle 01 commitment. Package RP-005A; Test TST-RP005A001; Result R-RP005A001. Decision D-0007 records the disposition. This review uses preserved evidence, collects no new research data and is not external peer review.

Review question and acceptance basis

Has the declared restrictions study delivered the structural edge-removal inclusion, V0–V2 regimes, greedy/short/sufficient planner profiles, constraint-relative primary coverage, underlying secondary coverage and the conditional-benefit interpretation lock? The frozen baseline sets that commitment. The pre-outcome PC03 supplement declares the graphs, targets, rewards, restriction rules, exact tie-breaking, separate planning/future budgets and finite verification contract.

Accept the specified finite commitment. Its constructive cases demonstrate that a supplied restriction can improve post-action target options for this short-horizon reward planner, can be unnecessary, and can harm those options. The structural inclusion and selection/deletion decomposition explain why this is compatible with losing paths. Completion requires retaining every adverse outcome and interpretation boundary; it does not require a positive result in every regime or settle arbitrary-domain reachability.

Deliverable-by-deliverable review

Required work	Preserved evidence and assessment
Structural inclusion	Pure edge removal retains only original paths with the same unit transition cost. All 35 source records verify inclusion both without a budget and at B=3, with 313 ordered source/destination checks per family. No new reachable node appears.
V0 unnecessary restriction	Removing s→b leaves selected a and primary coverage 3/5 at H=1/2/4. Every paired difference is zero, while source-level unbounded target options fall 5/5→3/5.
V1 attractive delayed-cost trap	Removing s→b changes b→a at H=1/2, increasing primary coverage 2/5→3/5. H=4 already selects a in both arms and gives zero difference. The restriction designer knows the complete graph.
V2 harmful over-restriction	Removing s→a forces b at every H, lowering primary and underlying coverage 3/5→2/5. All three negative differences remain in the record.
Auxiliary C0 control	Removing s→b and a→t3 leaves selected a unchanged but lowers feasible target coverage 3/5→2/5. Original-graph underlying coverage stays 3/5. The fixed denominator exposes this downstream deletion loss.
Three planner profiles	H=1/2/4 use exact truncated integer reward maximization and lexical destination tie-breaking in both arms. Only the admissible edges change. One action is executed; H=4 is sufficient for these supplied graphs only.
Primary/secondary measures	The original five terminal targets and B=3 remain fixed. Every row saves target IDs, candidate scores, endpoints and counts. Coverage is existential bounded reachability, not visitation, indefinite safety or a viability kernel.
Difference decomposition	Every exact primary Delta equals original-graph selection S plus restricted-graph deletion L, with L≤0. Secondary coverage is explicitly counterfactual when it includes forbidden paths.
Complete coverage and verification	All 24 planner rows, 12 paired comparisons and 35 structural records independently replay, including exact ordering, types, all values and both inclusion families. Enumeration and shortest-distance reconstruction import no producer calculation code.
Registration and provenance	Source commit fe796a089df3e53101c20a20358391e84f59fc13 precedes recorded outcomes. All sixteen input hashes and seven output hashes match; all eight run files were committed before outcome interpretation. Test, Result and audit-stage report remain preserved.
Execution and stopping	One deterministic attempt, Python 3.12.14, no audit network or seeds, 0.024353542 monotonic seconds and 28.08 MiB peak RSS satisfy the fixed 60-second/128-MiB bounds. No failure, retry or outcome-dependent protocol change occurred.
Prior art and interpretation	The targeted primary-source review acknowledges familiar graph planning, truncated optimization and constrained horizon control, with inspection limits. It grants no novelty clearance, control-stability guarantee, learned-rule advantage or normative prescription.

The preparation and preserved-audit checks passed again for this review without creating a new run. Repository schema validation also checks the complete run against its first committed snapshot. These checks establish artifact integrity; this separate review supplies the interpretation and disposition judgment.

All paired outcomes retained

Regime	H=1 primary difference	H=2 primary difference	H=4 primary difference	Interpretation
V0	0	0	0	Same endpoint; no policy gain despite lost source options.
V1	+1/5	+1/5	0	Short-horizon endpoint selection improves; sufficient horizon already avoids the trap.
V2	-1/5	-1/5	-1/5	The useful branch is removed.
C0	-1/5	-1/5	-1/5	Same endpoint; one future target path is deleted.

The count remains two positive, four zero and six negative paired comparisons. These are designed fixtures and correlated horizon evaluations, not sampled restriction-benefit frequencies or twelve independent replicates. +1/5 denotes twenty percentage points of the original target universe. No smaller surviving-target denominator or beneficial-only pooling is accepted.

V1's positive Delta comes entirely from S; its L is zero at selected a. V2's negative Delta comes entirely from S. C0's negative Delta comes entirely from L. From original source s, unbounded coverage declines to 3/5 in V0/V1 and 2/5 in V2/C0. V1's original and restricted source-level B=3 target coverage are both 3/5, while post-action b has 2/5: the source and post-action budget origins must remain distinct.

Scientific limits and remaining questions

The rule is supplied using full graph knowledge; neither learning nor enforcement cost is modeled. The reward objective is not target coverage. Forced first-action execution, exact deterministic DAGs, terminal targets, unit transition costs, arbitrary lexical labels and B=3 define the comparison. A sufficient horizon can remove the apparent benefit in V1. Structural deletion loss never becomes structural expansion.

Q-2 remains ACTIVE. Rule discovery under partial information, uncertain dynamics, enforcement/design costs, repeated decisions, robust safety, larger graphs, alternative rewards/targets, query-dependent representations and general benefit prevalence remain open. These extensions require a new scoped protocol and relevant prior-art review before execution or broader claims; they are not silently assigned to an invented receiving Cycle. No universal need for restrictions, ethical prescription, new theorem, empirical frequency or broad Claim is promoted.

Package and Cycle disposition

Accept RP-005A's declared Cycle 01 commitment as completed. Set RP-005A to CLOSED and resolve only the rp005a package-disposition obligation as completed under D-0007, with evidence links to this review, the audited report, scoped Result and decision. Retain RP002A/RP003/RP004 resolutions and all thirteen equal weights. Nine obligations remain unresolved; progress becomes 4/13 (30.8%) and Cycle 01 stays ACTIVE.

The original audit-stage report retains its historical ACTIVE/pending-disposition and 3/13 statement. Test TST-RP005A001, Result R-RP005A001, frozen inputs and run bytes remain unchanged. Current views link this review as the subsequent disposition. This review completes no Checkpoint A, graph validation, whole-Cycle synthesis, Foundation Review, transition or close bundle.

Next is Checkpoint A and the required research-graph review, with DAM X's supplied-source dependency kept visible. No DAM X pilot or blocked disposition is created here; its obligation remains unresolved. Do not start Cycle 2 without the required Cycle 01 reviews and transition decision.

Reopen RP-005A through a new recorded Decision if an artifact/hash mismatch, replay or coverage defect, wrong endpoint/score, violated budget, invalid Result or material interpretation error changes this assessment. Revisit its Cycle obligation then. Preserve original evidence; never repair the record by overwriting the run or frozen protocol.

Evidence references

Source record

Repository path: research/RP005A/RP005A_PACKAGE_REVIEW.md

SHA-256: dc23309494d28d6f3a62fcf96bb093fd0947a18410194e98be08bf17ad5ec6c8

This reading view is generated from the source. The downloaded Markdown preserves the original bytes.