Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- provenance:security:authentication [2026/09/22 07:08] – Refresh stale cached auth_report output blocks against a fresh script run; sampling-frame residue 44 -> 47. Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
+++ provenance:security:authentication [2026/09/22 07:11] (current) – Name the three ethics/artifacts fields and their two denominators in the 2026-09-22 note; record reviewer's rejected item. Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 4090: / Line 4090: @@
 That four-line header block is the **only** difference in either file: the remaining 257 lines of the 261-line report and 1,226 of the 1,230 lines of the prevalence dump are byte-identical to what was published. Both blocks here were replaced with the fresh output. The old file's ''2.8%'' and ''4.0%'' were 45/1,622 and 45/1,120 — the unsubsetted numerators Pass 4 rejected — and they survived only inside the cache.
-**A second, real defect fell out of the re-read.** //Folds and their residue// gave the sampling-frame residue as **44 distinct strings**; the script prints — and this page has always embedded — ''RESIDUE — 47 distinct source-list strings unmapped'', and the list below it has 47 entries. The 44 was a hand count that never matched its own output. Corrected to 47. The instrument residue in the paragraph above it (**203 distinct strings, 218 mentions**) is right, and so is every other figure in the //Every figure on the page// table that this run re-derived: median site-unit n **872**, **39 of 85** entries under 500, ''classification.method == llm'' **0 of 45** and **177** corpus-wide (2023:2 2024:27 2025:77 2026:71), ethics **45.5% / 68.2% / 68.3%** over populations 44, 44 and 41, and **258** prevalence strings across 261 detection tuples.
+**A second, real defect fell out of the re-read.** //Folds and their residue// gave the sampling-frame residue as **44 distinct strings**; the script prints — and this page has always embedded — ''RESIDUE — 47 distinct source-list strings unmapped'', and the list below it has 47 entries. The 44 was a hand count that never matched its own output. Corrected to 47. The instrument residue in the paragraph above it (**203 distinct strings, 218 mentions**) is right, and so is every other figure in the //Every figure on the page// table that this run re-derived: median site-unit n **872**, **39 of 85** entries under 500, ''classification.method == llm'' **0 of 45** and **177** corpus-wide (2023:2 2024:27 2025:77 2026:71), ''ethics.reviewOutcome'' **45.5%** and ''ethics.notifiedAffectedParties'' **68.2%** over a population of 44, and ''artifacts.availability'' **68.3%** over 41 — three fields over two denominators, which the //Every figure// table groups under the page section named //Ethics//, and **258** prevalence strings across 261 detection tuples.
 The other four cached outputs on this page were re-run as well and reproduce byte-for-byte: ''auth_audit-output.txt'', ''auth_quotecheck-output.txt'', ''auth_absence_probe-output.txt'' and ''auth_recall-output.txt''. All six embedded script blocks are byte-identical to the files under ''scripts/''.
-**Rejected:** nothing. No finding on the content page — its prose already matched the current script, which is why this was a cache defect and not a figure defect, and [[security:authentication]] was not saved.
+**Rejected:** nothing. The reviewer noted that the //Every figure// table files ''artifacts.availability'' under its //Ethics// row; that is a page-section label rather than a mis-attributed figure, and the row is left as it is. No finding on the content page — its prose already matched the current script, which is why this was a cache defect and not a figure defect, and [[security:authentication]] was not saved.
 ^ Item ^ Value ^