The cheap run is sized at the full rating, so under the peak limit a battery is
still short when it ends, and control plans the next run then. Home drew only
the run under way. `cheaproll` rolls the run on the way control does
(`modetrade.energy()` + `priceruns.plan()` at each run end, lifted from
`dayview._levels()`), reading the levels at the charge power the peak limit
leaves (peak aim less the house, else the rating). `homeview.mode_runs()` and
`price_windows()` use it for today: the grid block, the Today line and the
chart's cheap bars run to where control stops, each battery's block to its
own stop. Display only: no control change.
test_ux54: today's grid block of the night-before scenario now follows the roll.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Brings OPT-36 (#229) and TEST-37 (#231) onto release/1.0, which keeps
SAFETY-128 (#228). No textual conflicts. CHANGELOG: the SAFETY-128 entry
moved out of the released 0.20.0 section into "Not in a release yet" above
## 0.20.1; the 0.20.0 and 0.20.1 sections are identical to master.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
SAFETY-132: the 9.6 kW is the charge the add-on asked for in a test,
not a measured grid figure. SAFETY-133: the quarter also ends over the
3 500 W limit; the guard sees the load late (0.20.1 has no lateness check).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Patch bump: OPT-36 (Leftover solar counts Cheap hours only and Solar first batteries). No option changes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Review F1: a slot after B's run counts only if no slot from the expensive
hours on is cheaper (control plans B's charge left in the cheapest window
ahead), and x 0.95 of B's charge is stored. Three-price night: 1ac7fe9 left
the expensive hours 2.61 kWh short; now 0.
Review F2: a Solar first battery's drain until the expensive hours reads each
hour at no less than the night base (the profile is net of the sun). Read net,
a dark morning drained the battery the plan still counted; A's level fell,
the cheap run moved and was lost before it started (+0.40 EUR per 3 days).
The two real-price replays now cost what 0.20.0 does.
F3: the ux54 sweep's peak limit is 15 kW (the option's top). F4: the rest
comes from the grid (EN/NL). F5: CHANGELOG and DECISIONS wording.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Live 0.20.0: A (Leftover solar, 60 %) charged to 95 % while B (Cheap hours,
94 %) already covered the expensive hours. dayplan.plan() now takes off the
shortfall what Cheap hours batteries will hold when the hours start (the
ceiling or what their cheap run reaches under the peak aim) and what Solar
first batteries will still hold after the night's use. Home reads a give
block after the planned charge, plan_cover() is the plan's own figure, and
the Why line says other batteries cover.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Readings that Home Assistant delivers late but still changing passed
every staleness gate, so the loop corrected again each cycle an error
its last command had already fixed (10 s late: the give run swung and
exported to -1.9 kW), and the peak guard pushed to the inverter limit
on the same late figures (OPT-34 F-2).
app/lateness.py fits how long after a power request the meter shows
it. Over 8 s the readings are late: a request the battery reading has
not answered holds the loop (it may not lead the reading by more than
100 W) and caps the peak guard at what stands; unanswered for 23 s it
holds, then 0 W after stale_input_s. An amber row and one log line per
episode say so. With readings on time nothing changes (digests equal).
DECISIONS/SAFETY-128-late-readings.md; test_safety128.py.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Bdqr7PiaHcBnzPituu2yTC
- The OPT-23 headline said a daily-total forecast is now counted right by
day; OPT-30 (known issue) still over-counts by day. Say what changed.
- CI-15: 16 min was one run; runs took 16 to 24 min.
- UX-75: quote the page text as it reads.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
After a fresh today reading in the night (02:00 on the rig) went stale
(05:00), Hold.stand_in(as_today=True) served the 17:05 "tomorrow" figure
again until 06:00: the plan went back to 95 %, the latch took it, and
Leftover solar charged back up. read_sum() now skips that stand-in once
every today sensor has given a fresh reading for the day
(Hold.replaced()); the stale newer reading follows the OPT-27 rules.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
While a forecast is present and the cheap run holds, the night-charge latch is
rebuilt from the plan: a latched battery takes its current level whatever its
role this tick (a fresh figure may lower it below the SoC), one that left the
plan is dropped, a new one comes in only while it charges from the grid.
Test: a fresh brighter figure lowers A below its SoC, the sensors go quiet, A
does not charge back up. CHANGELOG summary says two fixes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Bdqr7PiaHcBnzPituu2yTC
With the forecast sensors silent from 17:05 the kept evening figure ended at
midnight + 3 h, in the middle of the night grid charge, and Leftover solar's
planned level went with it (rig: A 49.8 % against 79.9 %).
- A night grid charge that has started keeps its planned level when the forecast
goes (Controller._latch_charge, store key night_charge_latch), and the narrow
price gap with it (weather_held). A fresh figure still moves the level.
- The evening's tomorrow figure is today's until the bell starts (06:00 local),
up to 15 h old but only if it was usable at midnight (solarfc.Hold.stand_in).
- Screen: "No solar forecast now. The charge under way goes on to its planned
level." (EN/NL) while a latched battery is below its level.
- test_opt34.py (whole nights through the real control cycle, mutants), test_opt27
and test_modes_p4 adjusted to the new window and the kept level.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Bdqr7PiaHcBnzPituu2yTC
Text only (DECISIONS, DOCS, CHANGELOG): a step load alarms on the same cycle
as before; a steadily rising load alarms a little later; with peak_margin_w 0
a period can end up to 10 W over the limit without this alarm, as for 'Load
too high' (SAFETY-81). Owner accepted 2026-10-31.
test_safety126.py part 2: after a real overrun ends, _peak_landing()'s latch
is reset and the night's later landings are quiet (review F3).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
During the night grid charge under the peak reserve the guard alarmed
(ERROR PEAK_GUARD_FLOOR_LIMITED, "Battery stopped limiting the peak") and the
Batteries "Why" said "The peak limit needs power" at quarter ends, while every
quarter landed on the aim. The charge lands the period 0-7 W over the aim and
excess_w()'s 900 / remaining turns that into tens of kW in the last second;
with nothing able to give, check_peak_floor_limited() alarmed on any
wanted > 0.
Each cycle the guard wants power, _peak_landing() asks misses_aim(): with the
batteries at 0 W, does the period end more than ALARM_MISS_W over the aim? If
not, the decision is within_aim: no reserve alarm, no red peak row, no "Why"
peak. The claim and the commands are unchanged. A real overrun under the
reserve alarms on the same cycle as before.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
- TARIFF-24 DECISIONS: the hold keeps a Cheap hours charge; a Leftover solar
battery still stops without a forecast (it has no planned level, still true
after OPT-28: `dayplan.plan()` returns None and `charge_to()` gives None).
Adds "a run that has started runs to its end" for a give run begun in a hold.
- CHANGELOG 0.19.2: "when the period is over" -> "when the period would go
over the limit".
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Owner 2026-10-29: fix N=1 in this hotfix. _charge_headroom() no longer
returns early at one inverter, so the N=1 cheap-window maintenance charge
is held to charge_room_w() as at N=2; SAFETY-84's site-stop rule stays N>=2
only (at N=1 such a stop outranks the shaping anyway). The guard no longer
steps in and gives power at each quarter's end during that charge.
test_safety125.py: N=1 maintenance on 5 s and 10 s meters with late
readings, with and without a banked peak; the row in an N=2 maintenance
charge and in shadow mode; edge cases (blind past the hold, a start
mid-quarter, the summer-time change, the forecast in W, a 10 s meter, the
last second). test_safety84/87: three N=1 pins move. test_safety119: its
quarter-edge hand-back runs keep the old N=1 sizing as a fixture, plus a
check that with the new sizing nothing hands back. CHANGELOG, DECISIONS,
DOCS follow.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
- The over-the-limit rows ran over STYLE's 15 words (EN 16/19, NL 16/21)
and two Dutch Home sentences over 12 words; they were not in the samples,
so test_messages/test_ux46 never saw them. Now:
"Peak guard: grid charge limited, at this rate 5 814 W, over 5 413 W" /
"Piekbewaking: laden beperkt, aan dit tempo 5 814 W, boven 5 413 W",
"...idle, at this rate ..., over ..." / "...in rust, aan dit tempo ...",
NL Home "Laadt minder van het net om onder 5,4 kW te blijven." and
"Zou minder van het net laden om onder 5,4 kW te blijven."
The rows and the line are added to the samples. The under row is unchanged.
- CHANGELOG known issues and the DECISIONS note: at N=1 the maintenance
charge is not sized to the room, so SAFETY-99 still applies to it.
- DOCS: the peak guard row's new words.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A meter reading late near a quarter's end left seconds the projection did
not count (SAFETY-99), and charge_headroom_w() read them as room: the cheap
run (and price trading, and the N=2 maintenance charge) went back to full
power in the quarter's last seconds and the quarter could land over a banked
month peak or the cap. peakguard.charge_room_w() counts those seconds at the
held reading for the charge only; the guard's floor is unchanged.
The guard row said "idle, heading for 5 814 W, under this month's 5 413 W
peak". Over the limit at the current rate the row and the month-peak line
now say so, and that the grid charge is cut back.
Version 0.19.2, CHANGELOG, DECISIONS. test_safety125.py new; the lag pins
in test_price_run_fixes.py and test_opt20.py and the AST pin in
test_arbitrage.py follow the change (see the pull request).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
With battery modes on, the price gap a mode needs was always widened x1.5 by
Uncertainty.NO_WEATHER, even with a solar forecast read, so a 0.08 day/night
gap never traded at the shipped cycle cost. The doubt is now added only when
no usable forecast is read (solar_fc is None, the day plan's own test), in the
run plan (_price_runs), the charge gate (_mode_roles) and Home's mirror
(homeview.trade_verdict). The rule is one helper, arbitrage.weather_uncertainty();
the modes-off trade path (main.py cycle) keeps its literal NO_WEATHER.
DOCS "Battery modes" sentence, CHANGELOG 0.19.1 line and the DECISIONS note
follow. Tests: test_tariff24_weather.py.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
With battery modes on, a day/night or fixed static_profile, no price feed and
arbitrage off, tariff_refresh_wanted() was false: no tariff task, no
tariff_plan, mode_runs None, so Leftover solar / Cheap hours never charged from
the grid and the Batteries screen said "No prices". packmode.enabled(opts) is
now a third term of the gate. With price_provider off the task is pure
arithmetic on static_profile, so no HTTPS call is added.
Also: version 0.19.1, CHANGELOG entry, DECISIONS note, test_tariff24.py, and a
shorter tariff_refresh_wanted() docstring (history stays in DECISIONS).
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Owner chose 0.19.0 (2026-10-26) because PRICE-02 changes trading behaviour.
Version and CHANGELOG heading/first line only; no option changes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bump version to 0.18.3 and add the 0.18.3 CHANGELOG section: DOC-8, UX-45,
SAFETY-119, SAFETY-121, UX-46, PRICE-02. A patch bump: no option added,
removed or renamed, no default changed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
Review of PR #199. "Warns once" left out the Home row and the Settings
note, which stay while the fault lasts. "No option change" now points to
the one case that needs a look.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
SAFETY-118 line: the add-on already turns a kW forecast into W
(main.py read_inputs, abs(raw) < 50), so only the settings-page warning is
wrong. Rounding note and rows: the new settings page; UX-44 also changed
one DOCS line.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
OPT-15 and OPT-20 rows: the retry is two inverters only, and OPT-20 no
longer claims no other battery moves. SAFETY-111 added to known issues.
MAINT-19 marked as from code reading. Wording fixes in the SAFETY-112 and
MAINT-11 rows, UX-38 and the price service note.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
config.yaml version 0.17.0 -> 0.18.0 and a closed ## 0.18.0 CHANGELOG
section for OPT-17, SAFETY-112, OPT-15, MAINT-11, PRICE-01 and OPT-20.
No code change.
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
SAFETY-107 row names the tested base; MAINT-17 says code reading only;
SAFETY-105 figure is from a simulation; SAFETY-97 edge is 175 W; the
maintenance note cites MAINT-14 and MAINT-15; SAFETY-108 "about 15 s".
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bump version to 0.17.0 and add the closed 0.17.0 CHANGELOG section.
No code change, no option change.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
SAFETY-103 swing 'by about 800 W for about 5 s'; SAFETY-99 'late, by less
than 30 s'; MAINT-10 row: one-at-a-time is not new; SAFETY-96: drop the
test-only 800 W; SAFETY-90 and MAINT-10 rows trimmed to two sentences.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
config.yaml version 0.14.0 -> 0.15.0 (minor: behaviour change from
SAFETY-94/97, no option change). New `## 0.15.0` section with the contents
since 0.14.0 (cf705a9#171, 3129dae#172) and the known issues.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Slew step not one house's 400 W; three two-inverter known issues, not
four; commissioning reference covers a new install; SoC example holds
for decimal sensors; SAFETY-95 states the jump, not the export.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Two inverters are now supported for maintenance and the peak guard
(SAFETY-91, SAFETY-93). No option changes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Crash, not stop, for SAFETY-61; Watchdog off by default; its own
warning for the 50 W peak margin (also under a higher month peak);
"refuses power" for SAFETY-52/73; no one-house options claim.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Bump config.yaml version 0.12.0 -> 0.13.0 and close a ## 0.13.0
CHANGELOG section covering every merge since 0.12.0 (a45ed06), with the
known issues SAFETY-90/91/92/93/94. Option surface 77 -> 83, none removed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Self-review. The note added to `### SAFETY-57` said the reading rule it is
qualifying is "two paragraphs up"; it is in the paragraph directly above - the
same one the note follows. A changelog that misdirects a reader to a paragraph
that is not there is the small end of exactly the defect this cut is fixing
three sentences of elsewhere, so it is corrected rather than left.
Text only, one line pair, still two files in the branch's diff.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
Two files, and no third. config.yaml 0.10.1 -> 0.11.0; CHANGELOG.md gains
`## 0.11.0` and three corrections to sections below it.
A MINOR BUMP, NOT A PATCH. TEL-11 adds an option - `pv_entity`, 75 keys -> 76 in
`options:` and `schema:` together - which is the same test 0.8.0, 0.9.0 and
0.10.0 were cut on. Nothing here can refuse a stored blob: the key is `str?`
with an `options:` default of "", validate.py does not mention it, no default
moved and no enum widened, so a blob that starts the add-on on 0.10.1 starts it
on 0.11.0.
THE TABLE HAS TWO ROWS AND THE WINDOW HAD FOUR MERGES. CI-9's follow-up
(9f6b9f1, `.gitea/workflows/checks.yml` only) and SEC-2 (239e120,
`docs/RELEASE.md` + README.md) are excluded under PKG-15's rule - AUDIENCE, NOT
IMPORTANCE. Neither file is under `goodwe_controller/`, neither is in the built
image, neither is in predeploy_check.py's RUNTIME tuple, and there is no version
of this add-on on which an operator can observe either. SEC-2 is the closer call
and the section argues it in full rather than asserting it: it is the more
consequential ticket of the two - it is why this release is a pull request
rather than a push to master - and it is still a procedure for whoever cuts a
release, not something the person deciding whether to press Update can act on.
Both are named in the section with pointers to PR #102 / checks.yml and PR #108
/ docs/RELEASE.md.
WHAT THE ENTRIES LET AN OPERATOR DECIDE. SAFETY-56: behaviour byte-identical
(6030175ed2ab..., reproduced in the CI image over 2390 capture reads, a 66-cell
grid stepped 120 times and six driven worlds), three surfaces named with the old
and new wording side by side - the STALE_READING line quoted onto the action log
and status page, the SAFETY-37 ERROR log line, and the readiness row that
asserted a false fact about a named entity. TEL-11: unset is byte-identical in
BOTH the control and telemetry documents, set is byte-identical in the control
document only; the three TEL-11 rows of that table were re-measured in the CI
image on this tree (control 846a10a5... twice, telemetry a443a6ce... / 4e6d1cb2...).
It is stated plainly that pv_entity is not a control input and does not change
what the loop does, and that absence publishes `unknown` rather than 0.
THREE CORRECTIONS BELOW THE NEW SECTION, WITHOUT REWRITING HISTORY. The 0.10.1
preamble said SAFETY-56 was open; the SAFETY-57 entry said its accusatory
diagnosis half was "deliberately untouched"; the 0.10.0 preamble left SAFETY-56
with no pointer while SAFETY-57 had one. All three quotations are what the
0.10.1 image actually prints and are left standing - a reader on 0.10.1 has to
recognise them - each now scoped to 0.10.1 and pointed at `## 0.11.0`.
VERIFIED. test_version_gate.py part 11 all four: 11a one contents table and the
slicer closed (302 lines under '0.11.0'), 11b 0.11.0 == config.yaml, 11c all
three RETIRED_PROVIDERS ids named - scoped to a pre-0.10.0 crossing and pointing
at `## 0.10.0`, which is where the evidence is - 11d still exactly one
`## Unreleased` below, PKG-08's, untouched. 31/31 in the CI image, checks.yml's
exact command, purged tree, `:ro`.
Not deployed and not installed. Shipping is a separate pull request from
release/1.0 into master, per docs/RELEASE.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
The Supervisor decides an update exists by comparing config.yaml's version
string with the one the box reports. master and release/1.0 both said 0.10.0,
so SAFETY-57 - a deadlock that parked the reference battery for ~13 min on
2026-09-21 while the house exported 2.4 kW - had no way of reaching the box
that has it. A patch bump is the delivery mechanism, not bookkeeping.
- config.yaml: 0.10.0 -> 0.10.1. Nothing else in the option surface moves:
no key added or removed, no default changed, no enum widened, no rule added
to validate.py, so a blob that starts on 0.10.0 starts on 0.10.1.
- CHANGELOG.md: a new `## 0.10.1` section, holding SAFETY-57's entry moved out
of `## 0.10.0`. The entry opened by saying it was misfiled and that whoever
cut the next version owned moving it; this is that cut, so that paragraph is
replaced by what an operator actually needs in order to decide - what the
deadlock does (command parked at 0 W, batt reading gated to MISSING, escape
condition unreachable from inside the state), how to recognise it (setpoint
stuck at exactly 0 W with the battery register flat, a STALE line and no
clearing line) and that a restart of the add-on clears it.
- PKG-16 proper: `## 0.10.0`'s preamble still claimed 0.10.0 "has never been
built or pulled anywhere" and that the reference install was on 0.7.0. Both
stopped being true on 2026-09-20 ~22:18 CEST, when 0.10.0 was installed as a
repository add-on (slug 68285ac7_goodwe_controller) and began regulating a
real battery. The section's own bump argument was explicitly conditional on
that; the condition has fired, so the argument is retold as history and the
section is closed. This text is what the Supervisor shows beside Update.
Also fixes, in this file only, the three non-blocking documentation defects
raised on PR #104 - issuecomments 1445, 1446 and 1447:
- 1446: the live episode is 790 s, not 710 s. Re-derived rather than rescaled:
at >= 790 s the committed 16-day replay gives 16 of 93, not 17.
- 1447: the BMS keep-alive pulse was an inference stated as a measurement. No
committed capture identifies one, and on this episode 0x0518 never moved at
all. The measured claim replaces the firmware story.
- 1445: "neither consumer can reach a verdict inside one window" is universal
as written and graded on a fixture that puts the obligation back on every
release. It now carries the qualifier the reviewer asked for, and names the
unbounded case and why the shipped one-inverter roster cannot reach it.
The same three defects also sit in app/freshness.py, test_freshness.py,
DOCS.md and the DECISIONS note. They are deliberately NOT touched here: this
PR is config.yaml and CHANGELOG.md only, and none of them is worth delaying a
live safety fix. SAFETY-56 and SAFETY-58 are likewise untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
SAFETY-37's freshness gate reports a battery-power register as MISSING when it
stops following its own command, and a missing input is "command 0 W and keep
commanding" (§11.1 rule 1). The gate's only exit was "an arrival carrying a
DIFFERENT number" - and at 0 W nothing is asking the register to be anywhere.
The state had no exit reachable from inside it, and the log line promised the
opposite in the same sentence that announced the 0 W.
REPRODUCED FROM THE WIRE, NOT MODELLED. scenarios/safety57-2026-09-21/ is 3840
verbatim frames off the RS-485 pair, read from the passive sniffer, decoded by
tools/decode_bus_capture.py (0 unparsed, 0 bad CRC, 0 unknown shapes; the
mode->sign convention is graded off the capture, not trusted). The box was
running 0.10.0, so the 0 W in the trace IS the add-on's own claim:
10:51:24.7 0x0518 reaches -3 W. Pack at 11 %, the BMS refuses the discharge,
the inverter idles. THE REGISTER IS HEALTHY AND TRUTHFUL.
10:51:29.7 the command reaches +1060 W - 800 W of travel
10:52:00 the conjunction arms. Inverter.batt becomes None
10:52:21.7 the site commands 0 W, on the wire
... 0x0518 does not change value for 850.0 s. The setpoint does not
change value for 790.0 s. The house exports 2.4 kW throughout
~11:04 a human restarts the add-on. That is what ends it
AND IT HAD BEEN ESCAPING BY LUCK. Replaying the committed 16-day loop capture
through the shipped conjunction finds 93 trips whose wait for the BMS
keep-alive pulse that cleared them has a median of 143.4 s, a worst case of
21440.1 s, and 17 of 93 at or beyond this episode's 710 s. That distribution
belongs to the battery's firmware, not to this code.
THE CARD'S OPTION 2 ALREADY HELD AND IS NOT THE BUG. _grade() has required
|standing| >= MOVE_W since SAFETY-37. The trip was at +1060 W and the stuck
state is at 0 W; they are different moments, and an entry-side rule cannot
reach a state entered legitimately and then persisted. Nothing in the
conjunction is weakened here.
THE RULE, SAFETY-13's SHAPE ONE MODULE OVER - which latches get an exit, not
how long the block lasts:
the verdict is withdrawn when the obligation that produced it has been gone
for RELEASE_S, and the register is then re-graded from scratch.
RELEASE_S is BATT_OBLIGED_S, 17.0 s - the obligation window already derived in
the file (6.0 plant + 10.0 publish + 1.0 read), taken at the FLOOR of its band
for the mirror of MOVE_W's reason. Which half is safe is the opposite of
SAFETY-13's: being wrong long is the failure being fixed, being wrong short
costs one bounded re-grading window. Below 17 s the release pre-empts the
cheaper exit - the register answering by itself - and that is graded
behaviourally, not asserted.
The whole parked interval is now stale_input_s + RELEASE_S = 32 s. On the live
episode: telemetry back at 10:52:39 instead of 11:05:35, with 0x0518 still
answering the same -3 W. RED BEFORE (release_s=inf, a graded counterfactual and
not a second implementation), GREEN AFTER.
WHAT IT COSTS, AND IT IS NOT SMALL. A register dead for good is re-graded for
ever: over 1201 reads the held number reaches a consumer on 630 (52.5 %)
against 35 (2.9 %) before. Payable only because one window is at most 35 s and
the two consumers hold for 75 s and 85 s, so neither can reach a verdict inside
one and the re-trip clears both windows. No detection SAFETY-37 had is given
back - a permanent None clears the same windows for ever too - and the command
is derived from the P1 meter, never from batt.
Two clocks, deliberately: changed_mono/unchanged_s() stay facts about the
REGISTER, graded_from/graded_s() are the VERDICT's window. Collapsing them
either lies to the operator or defeats the re-grading.
main.py's stale line had its ESCAPE CLAUSE corrected - it promised a clearance
the state could not produce - and gained a STALE WITHDRAWN edge that says in
its own words that nothing has been learned about the register. The DIAGNOSIS
half is SAFETY-56's and is deliberately untouched, with a named check asserting
it is still there so that rewrite has to be deliberate.
Battery: 22 mutations, 21 red, 1 argued equivalent, 0 unexplained survivors.
Two findings kept in DECISIONS: _release()'s move_w test swapped for
unchanged_s SURVIVED at +5 B because every fixture rested at exactly 0 W (habit
11, closed by a 0/100/300 W fixture); and the code shipped a habit-22 comment
claiming the _release/_grade order was load-bearing, which the battery
falsified - the two act on mutually exclusive predicates, so the order is not
observable. MUTATION.md gains habit 23 for a mutation that ran, fingerprinted
clean, and was a no-op on the fixture because `0.0 or x` is x.
Suite: 30/30 in the CI image, checks.yml's exact command, purged tree, :ro, one
file at a time.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
0.10.0 was cut by PKG-14 on 2026-09-16 and three tickets have merged into
release/1.0 since. Two of them change the built image - one is a CONTROL LAW
change and one adds three MQTT entities - and neither is described anywhere in
this file. Tagging that tree today would stamp a number on contents the
changelog does not account for.
FOLDED RATHER THAN CUT AS 0.11.0, AND THE ARGUMENT IS CONDITIONAL.
0.10.0 has never been built or pulled anywhere: the reference install is on
0.7.0 (PKG-14's own predeploy run records `deployed on the box : 0.7.0`), the
repository carries exactly one tag, `v0.2.1`, and no release. So the string
`0.10.0` does not yet name a tree anyone is running, and the PKG-06/PKG-07
no-op that forbade re-cutting `0.9.0` does not reach it. Cutting 0.11.0 would
burn a number on a release that never left the repository. The condition is
checkable and the section now says so: run against a box already reporting
0.10.0, `tools/predeploy_check.py` refuses with THE DEPLOY WOULD BE A NO-OP and
names the runtime commits since the bump. `config.yaml` stays at 0.10.0, so
`test_version_gate.py` 11b still finds the two sides equal.
SAFETY-48 IS THE ENTRY THAT MATTERED MOST TO GET RIGHT, AND WHAT IT PROMISES
IS LESS EXPORT - NOT A LOWER BILL. The measured result is export 39.61 -> 34.07
kWh over the committed 16-day replay, 14 % of the replayed figure, falling at
every plant and tuning variant swept (~4 % to ~16 %, median near an eighth).
The section says in its own heading and its first line that the control law
changed, and it says PLAINLY that the billed quarter is not a claim: at every
plant lag <= 5.0 s - including the one that best reproduces the recorded export
- release/1.0's worst quarter is ALREADY 3434 W and this changes it by exactly
zero. The 3739 -> 3434 W headline exists at the single longest fitted lag, and
the lag is not identified by the recording. The costs are in the entry too: the
cap moves a saturation-frozen integrator on 1095 of 79 160 frozen ticks, 679 of
them outward; SAFETY-13's settle values moved; SAFETY-39's "the slew does not
own the over-absorption" is now false.
TEL-10 gets the three site rows, what each one is, and the two things a reader
would otherwise get wrong: the lead is NOT a subtraction of two published rows,
and `Loop reason` is not the `Why` row. It repeats neither of the two sentences
TEL-10's own review retracted - EIGHT messages stay first and the ninth,
`goodwe_ctl/availability`, is byte-identical but deliberately moves to last.
CI-9 IS DELIBERATELY NOT IN THIS FILE, AND THE OMISSION IS WRITTEN DOWN RATHER
THAN SILENT. It changes one file, `.gitea/workflows/checks.yml`, outside
`goodwe_controller/` entirely: not in the built image, not in `is_runtime()`'s
list, and not observable on any version of the add-on. This file is the release
note the Supervisor shows beside the version number, and a row here has to be
something the person deciding whether to press Update could act on. The note
above SAFETY-48 says so and says the rule is about audience, not importance.
THE STRAY `## Unreleased` AT LINE 1777 IS NOT TOUCHED, AND THAT IS A DECISION.
It is the 0.8.0-era block PKG-14 annotated: every row in it has shipped, the
annotation says which release each went to, and re-filing it is PKG-08's card.
It is also load-bearing - `test_version_gate.py` 11d pins the count of
`## Unreleased` blocks below the newest section at EXACTLY one, so deleting it
is red on the commit that does it, and so is adding a second.
TWO MEASURED FIGURES IN PKG-14'S PROSE WENT STALE AND ARE RE-DERIVED, NOT
ADJUSTED. The runtime-commit count since `86bdf49` is now 32, not 28, of which
the contents table accounts for 24, not 21; both re-run through
`predeploy_check.is_runtime()` itself. The other eight are the three misfiled
tickets (SAFETY-43 x2, SAFETY-44 x3, TEST-21 x2) and `cb3f686`, PKG-14's own
bump, which edits `config.yaml` and so counts as runtime - it was HEAD when
PKG-14 measured and is inside the range now.
PKG-14's `CLEARED, exit 0` predeploy transcript was NOT re-run and now carries
the check that says why it still holds: `config.yaml` is untouched by both
tickets; `app/validate.py` imports neither `main` nor `mqtt`, and the three
names it takes from `control` - SLEW_RAIL_FRAC, LOOP_TICK_S, PLANT_SETTLE_S -
are byte-identical across cb3f686..HEAD.
Verified: the full suite in the CI image, `cp -a` of the tree, purged, `:ro`
mount, one file at a time, exactly the command in .gitea/workflows/checks.yml -
30/30, exit 0. No runtime file is in this diff.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
`config.yaml` 0.9.0 -> 0.10.0, and the top `## Unreleased` block is closed
into `## 0.10.0` with a preamble that names the backward-incompatible
changes and who they reach.
MINOR, and NOT because eighteen tickets landed. A stored options blob the
previous version started on is REFUSED on this one:
* TARIFF-07 retires three `price_provider` ids; a site set to one is
refused BY NAME at startup. Measured on the reference blob, with a
control on an accepted id so the refusals are about the ID.
* TARIFF-18 moves `price_taxes_eur_kwh` 0.06 -> 0.11736. A site that
STORED 0.06 is untouched, and - the non-obvious half - a taxes period
table beside that stored 0.06 does NOT become a startup refusal on
upgrade, because `SUPERSEDED_TAXES_DEFAULTS_EUR_KWH` reads it as
untouched. Measured, with the counterfactual that the rung is not
weakened (ORES's 0.1198 is still refused).
* SAFETY-10 adds `shadow_mode`, shipped `auto`. An existing CONTROLLING
install does not change by one watt and a FRESH one comes up observing.
Measured cross-revision, 8f82dd4 -> e6da478, same stimulus through the
shipped `Controller.cycle()`: byte-identical write streams, 13/13/25
writes. Positive control: the same driver at `shadow_mode: on` gets 13
writes to 5000 W on the older tree and one 0 W write on the newer.
And the one a reader of the newest section alone would miss: `ha addons
update` does not walk the versions, so a 0.7.0 install meets 0.8.0's and
0.9.0's rules at the same moment as 0.10.0's. Of those, SAFETY-39's rule 10
refuses 0.7.0's OWN shipped default `slew_w: 1000` against a 555.6 W
ceiling on a 5000 W rail. Measured red on this tree; the reference
install's `slew_w: 400` is measured green.
SCOPE, and it is drawn honestly rather than tidily. The top block's 18
entries all merged after the 0.9.0 bump `86bdf49`, so the block is closed
as-is and its `_this branch_` placeholders are resolved to merge shas.
⚠️ 0.10.0 SHIPS THREE MORE RUNTIME TICKETS THAT ARE NOT IN THAT TABLE -
SAFETY-43, TEST-21 and SAFETY-44 - and they are NAMED in the preamble
rather than moved, because re-filing this file's misplaced entries is
PKG-08. SAFETY-44 (`app/main.py`, `app/store.py`) is in the changelog
nowhere at all; that is said in both places. The second `## Unreleased`
block below `## 0.9.0` is ANNOTATED, not rewritten or emptied - UX-02 in it
shipped in 0.9.0, the other three in 0.10.0. No released section is
rewritten.
`test_version_gate.py` gains part 11: the bump and the closed section are
one act. PKG-09 refuses a deploy whose version did not move; nothing graded
the mirror failure, in which the version moves and the block is never
closed. Two sides from two files, a slicer with a synthetic positive
control run on every invocation, the retired ids read off `app/price.py` by
AST rather than transcribed, and the count of still-misfiled blocks frozen
so it can only shrink.
Mutations, all purged, tree bind-mounted :ro, backups at mktemp paths and
the revert fingerprinted:
M1 `## 0.10.0` -> `## Unreleased` +4 B RED 2
M2 version 0.10.0 -> 0.10.1 +0 B RED 1 (ZERO-BYTE)
M3 an id stripped from the NEWEST +10 B RED 1
section only, left below
M4 a 4th retired provider in price.py +62 B RED 1 here, 4 in
test_price.py
M5 `## 0.9.0` heading lost -3 B RED 1
M6 a 2nd `## Unreleased` left standing +27 B RED 1
M7 the slicer never closes -32 B RED 3
M8 SUPERSEDED_TAXES... emptied -5 B RED 2 on the evidence
instrument, plus
test_validate/test_price
⚠️ M5 WAS A SURVIVOR ON THE FIRST DRAFT. The slicer control was a sentinel
(`## 0.8.0`) that only a slicer running to EOF could reach, and deleting one
heading never gets there - ARCH-02's fifteenth instance, in a fresh costume.
11a now asserts the invariant instead: exactly one contents table per
section, which is what a lost heading breaks.
29/29 test files green. `tools/predeploy_check.py --deployed-version 0.7.0
--options <live blob>` CLEARED, exit 0, before and after.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
Not a leak and not a write-path defect. Shadow mode's safety is intact -
the substitution, the re-seed, the authorisation gate and the clamp are
untouched. What was wrong is what three merged documents SAY a shadow run
can show you, and a number on the status row that can be 6.61x what a live
controller would command.
SHADOW MODE CANNOT SURFACE A CLOSED-LOOP DEFECT, AND THE DOCUMENTS NOW SAY
SO. The battery is held at 0 W and the carried command is re-seeded to it,
so every measured input - the meter, the billed-quarter accumulator behind
it, the battery power, the SoC - describes a plant that did not respond. A
closed-loop defect is one whose stimulus IS that response. This is the same
property that makes shadow mode safe, so it is not a gap to close later:
the closed-loop answer comes from the closed-loop rig or from a live run.
SAFETY-10 §5 already conceded this for the grid-following loop. It was
never the loop leg's limitation; it is the general case.
THE "STRATEGIES ARE UNAFFECTED" EXEMPTION WAS TRUE UNTIL SAFETY-45 MERGED,
ONE COMMIT EARLIER. That card sizes the buy leg as min(asked, headroom)
with headroom = (900/remaining) x (ceiling - projected), and `projected`
reads the open quarter's accumulator - the meter - which is a function of
what the battery did earlier in that quarter. Measured on TEST-23 stage 3
at peak_cap_w 1500 / house 1200 / max_w 2000, one hour at 5 s:
SAFETY-45's limit cycle NOT visible. 28 onsets live vs 1; grid
-455.5..+3200.0 W vs flat at the 1200 W house;
guard engaged 410/720 cycles vs 0/720.
SAFETY-46's SoC churn NOT visible. The SoC moves 0.000000000 pp.
TARIFF-14's wrong hour VISIBLE, and it is the only one: which hour, at
what price, clearing what spread - identical on
720 of 720 charging cycles at a binding cap.
The exemption narrows to exactly what survives: WHICH hour a strategy picks
and WHY are unaffected; HOW HARD it trades is not. The peak guard's ceiling
and reasons are worth reading from a shadow run; its ENGAGEMENTS are not.
THE NUMBER IS CAVEATED, NOT RE-COMPUTED, AND THAT IS THE DECISION. The
arithmetic is not wrong - 900/remaining is correct for a meter genuinely
under the ceiling, and in shadow the meter genuinely is. It is the right
answer to a question nobody asked. Both surfaces now introduce the watts as
what would have been commanded ON THIS CYCLE, in every state, and carry
shadow.SIZED_FROM_METER whenever a measured billed quarter sized them.
Rejected, and recorded in the decision doc: re-computing it (the recorded
decision would no longer be the decision the shipped path reached, while the
arbiter, clamp, SAFETY-28 gate, log and MQTT all ran on the real one - a
second controller everywhere except the wire); recording nothing (blanks the
row exactly when arbitrage is trading, and the log's edge key is the watts);
and recording the unsized ask beside it (a second number, no warning, and at
the shipped 3500/2000 both figures read 2000 W).
"UPPER BOUND" AND NOT "SMALLER", AND THE DIFFERENCE WAS MEASURED. Charging
only adds offtake, so the shadow size is >= the live size with EQUALITY at
the start of every quarter. Pairwise over 3600 charging cycles in five
configurations: 0 below, 730 exactly equal. The first draft said "smaller",
which would have been false on every one of those 730.
AND THE PREDICATE IS NOT KEYED ON WHETHER THE TRADE WAS CAPPED. arbitrage's
own sentence says "SIZED BY THE CAPACITY-TARIFF GUARD" only when the
headroom came out below the ask - in a shadow run, the START of the quarter,
where the two runs agree to the float. By the end, 900/remaining has
multiplied the headroom past the ask, the trade is not capped, the sentence
is silent, and the record is at its most wrong. A caveat keyed on it would
be quietest exactly where it is needed loudest.
SAFETY-10 §6's COMMITTED EVIDENCE COULD NEVER HAVE FAILED, FOR TWO
INDEPENDENT REASONS, AND CLOSING EITHER ALONE CLOSES NOTHING. Its fixture is
peak_cap_w 15000 against a 350 W house, so the guard never engages and the
sizing is inert - the harness's own comment says so. AND every identity row
reads the FIRST charging sample, where at elapsed=0 the projection IS the
held level and the two runs agree to the float even at a cap that does bind.
Measured: widening the fixture alone leaves that comparison passing. That
second reason is a new shape for MUTATION.md's habit-4 list - an INDEX, not
a fixture - and it is recorded there as the twelfth instance. §6 is re-taken
at a binding cap across the whole run: 716 of 720 charging cycles differ,
headroom 300.0..54000.0 W in shadow against 299.9..307.8 W live, recorded
-2000.0 W against a live -302.4 W.
THE GRADER IS test_arbitrage.py PART 3d, beside SAFETY-45's own closed-loop
regression and built on the same s45_loop() harness, so the runs differ in
one argument. Three lines stand in for _write_unit()'s substitution and
_shadow_settle()'s record and re-seed, marked as a transcription;
test_clamp.py part 8 remains the check on the shipped placement. The section
carries its own precondition into every check: a mutation that stopped
either run trading made it raise on its first min(), kill the file and
report ZERO reds - FCST-06's shape, driven rather than imagined.
AND THE FIX'S OWN FIRST DRAFT CARRIED THE SAME DEFECT. Deleting the caveat
from the action-log line left all 29 files green, because the sentence was
an f-string inside _shadow_settle() and the only suite that drives it uses a
meter_source:off fixture where no arbitrage decision exists. It is
shadow.log_line() now, for the reason words() is a function.
14 mutations, no survivors; M13 and M14 are +0 B and were confirmed on disk
by sha256 with every run purged. M14's first form was aimed at the wrong
direction and correctly survived - min->max makes the shadow record larger,
which is still an upper bound. All 29 check files green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
Every optimiser defect this project has found was invisible from outside
while it was happening, and each was paid for at the meter first: SAFETY-45's
28 charge onsets an hour against a binding peak_cap_w, TARIFF-14's wrong
quarter-hour for 45 minutes in every 60, SAFETY-46's 598 Wh spent to gain
310 Wh. There was no way to watch what the optimiser WOULD do without letting
it do it.
`shadow_mode` runs strategies, arbiter, clamps and guards, records the
decision with its reason, and commands nothing.
⚠️ IT WRITES. It writes 0 W, on the ordinary heartbeat, through the ordinary
single writer. The inverter holds its last command forever - it has no meter
timeout - so "commands nothing" implemented as "stops writing" would leave
whatever was standing when shadow mode came on standing for as long as it was
left on, under a page saying nothing is being commanded. That is the failure
this repository keeps finding. Refreshing 0 W is also what
firmware/goodwe-master.yaml's 30 s stale-input watchdog requires of us; going
quiet would keep that board tripped for the whole run, which is an alarm being
used as a mode.
⚠️ IT IS NOT A SECOND WRITE PATH. No claim, no transport, no arithmetic of its
own. It is a substitution inside Controller._write_unit() - the single choke
point every write already reaches - in the same form as the three above it,
and it is the LAST of them, so SAFETY-28's gate and SAFETY-03's clamp still
grade the number the decision path produced.
⚠️ THE DEFAULT IS `auto`, NOT `true`, AND THAT IS THE CARD'S REAL CONTENT. The
Supervisor composes options as {**config.yaml defaults, **stored user
options}, so a new key with a new default reaches EVERY EXISTING INSTALL on
the next update - including the one regulating a real battery. A boolean
default-on would have stopped it silently. There is no mechanism by which one
key can default differently for a new install and an existing one, so
"default-on for new" is a value the add-on RESOLVES: `auto` is shadow while
control is STOPPED and live once it is STARTED. A fresh install ships
`auto_start: false` and comes up observing; an install that is controlling is
started and does not change by one watt.
THE FAILSAFES. Sign watchdogs (SAFETY-02/30): INERT - they grade
Inverter.standing_w(), which shadow mode holds at 0 W. Fed the shadow decision
they would disagree with a meter that never saw it and LATCH A TRIP THAT
SURVIVES INTO LIVE OPERATION AND A RESTART. Clamp (SAFETY-03), write gate
(SAFETY-28), meter freeze (SAFETY-18), peak guard: OBSERVE. Circulation
(SAFETY-31) and delivery (SAFETY-42): observe and may legitimately latch,
because their evidence is measured power. The operator stop is the one
deliberate change: enforced at the wire rather than as a P_SAFETY claim, which
would otherwise make every recorded decision read "stopped".
⚠️ RECORDED LIMITATION: _shadow_settle() re-seeds the carried command to what
stands on the wire, which makes the exit safe by construction - and therefore
the loop leg's shadow decision is ONE SLEW STEP, not a trajectory. A shadow
run answers "what would it command now", not "what would it have done next".
The strategies are unaffected; all three defects above are visible from one.
Graded on the writes and on the rendered surface, never on the flag: 22
mutations, no survivors, including one that lets a write escape and one that
goes silent instead of commanding 0 W. Closed loop on TEST-23 stage 3's rig,
same hour twice: live drives the pack to -2000 W and SoC 50.000 -> 62.331 %;
shadow commands 0 W throughout, SoC stays 50.0 exactly, and the arbitrage
decision is identical in action, instant, signed power, reason and arbiter
winner.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
With arbitrage armed at the shipped defaults, arbitrage and the capacity-tariff
guard drove each other in a sustained limit cycle. Re-measured on TEST-23 stage
3's closed rig against 478ba93, metrics recomputed rather than taken from the
card: `peak_cap_w` 1500 / 1200 W house -> 28 charge onsets an hour, mean period
131.1 s, the grid swinging -455.5 to +3200.0 W; at the SHIPPED
`peak_cap_w: 3500` with an 1800 W house -> 8/h, with a 3000 W house -> 32/h.
The bite rule is `load + max_w > peak_cap_w`, i.e. any house over 1500 W in the
cheapest quarter. §10.2: "an EMS that oscillates is worse than no EMS, both for
hardware wear and - per §9.1 - for the peak it is trying to avoid." And it was
losing the argument it was having: EVERY billed quarter in the three affected
configurations finished OVER the cap.
⚠️ THE CARD'S STATED MECHANISM IS WRONG AND THE CORRECTION IS ON THE RECORD.
The card, and .cache/s45.md before it, say the loop is the quarter boundary
resetting the projection and arbitrage re-arming at full power. It is not. Of
the 27 gaps between the 28 onsets, 23 are 90-120 s (mean 111.5 s) and lie
ENTIRELY INSIDE one quarter; the four long gaps - 230, 240, 250, 255 s - are
exactly the four that SPAN a boundary, so the boundary LENGTHENS the interval
rather than causing an onset. The real cycle, off the recorded fields: the trade
charges at max_w while `wanted = batt_w + excess` is negative and the guard
files NOTHING; `wanted` crosses zero; the guard engages on a floor of 5.3 W;
that flips `arbitrage.guard_state()`, which cancels the WHOLE trade; the
grid-following loop - which targets grid = 0, not grid = ceiling - takes the
actuator and discharges to +1870 W, exporting 420 W; the projection collapses;
the guard releases; the trade re-arms at max_w. A binary interlock keyed on a
continuous quantity. A fix aimed at the boundary would have removed four of
twenty-eight onsets.
THE FIX IS A SHAPE THIS ADD-ON ALREADY HAD. `control.maintenance_charge_floor()`
caps a MAINTENANCE charge at "the headroom left under the site's cap", because
"a maintenance charge is the only thing this system does that is big enough and
long enough to set that peak". ⚠️ That sentence stopped being true when OPT-04
landed. `peakguard.charge_headroom_w()` publishes the same quantity off the
MEASURED guard rather than off the optional `peak_forecast_entity` - the hole
SAFETY-25 had to close in `shaping_suspended()` - and `arbitrage.decide()` sizes
its BUY leg to it, keyword-only and with no default.
NO NEW ARITHMETIC AND NO NEW CONSTANT. The number is `wanted_w` read in the
other direction: `decide()` already computes the DISCHARGE that lands the
quarter on the ceiling, and a negative one is a permitted CHARGE of `-wanted`.
⚠️ `peakguard.decide()` IS UNCHANGED - sha256(decide) = 200090d0835a3a55, 7252 B
on this branch and on 478ba93 - so 2026-08-20's anti-bang-bang rung is exactly
where it was, and tools/replay_ac3.py reproduces 190/190 guarded quarters, 110
engaged cycles, 5 blind and 878 Wh on both trees.
TWO PROPERTIES MAKE IT SAFE TO HAND A STRATEGY, BOTH SWEPT RATHER THAN ARGUED.
It is INVARIANT IN THE BATTERY - raise the charge by dW, the meter rises by dW,
so `excess` rises by dW while `batt_w` falls by dW and `wanted` does not move:
1350.0 W at every point across batt_w -5000..+2000 W on one banked quarter,
while the `excess` those runs see takes six distinct values. It is feed-forward,
so consuming it adds no feedback path around the plant. And HOLDING IMPLIES ZERO
OR UNKNOWN: across 1080 swept combinations not one ENGAGED decision answers a
positive headroom.
AFTER, same rig, same command. 1500/1200: 28 onsets -> 1, grid swing 3655.5 ->
282.0 W, energy bought 180.0 -> 285.2 Wh (+58%, because a continuous 300 W trade
beats a 2000 W trade cancelled for 57% of the hour), billed quarters
1490/1497/1509 -> 1500.0/1500.0/1500.0. 3500/1800: 8 -> 1, 3511/3536/3559 ->
3500/3500/3500. 3500/3000: 32 -> 1, 3519/3542/3557 -> 3500/3500/3500. The two
shipped-default rows buy 2.2% and 1.6% LESS energy and in exchange the worst
quarter goes from 59 W over the cap to zero - which is the ordering §10.1 asks
for, since the capacity tariff bills the month's single worst quarter.
⚠️ AND THE NEGATIVE CONTROL: at peak_cap_w 5000 with a 1200 W house, where
`load + max_w` never reaches the cap, the two runs are BIT-IDENTICAL.
⚠️ A NEGATIVE `lo` WAS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED, AND THE REASON IS IN THE CODE.
Deleting `decide()`'s `wanted <= 0` gate and filing `lo = wanted` is the tidier
answer arithmetically. It creates a new `lo > hi` CONTRADICTION against
main.py's cheap-window maintenance shaping, which files a NEGATIVE `hi`;
arbiter.py clause 2 has no notion of one limit out-ranking another, so it
resolves to 0 W - the battery PARKED in the quarter that sets the bill - and the
only way to close that suspends the maintenance charge shaping PERMANENTLY on
every site this card is about. A backoff or cooldown in arbitrage was rejected
too: both modules' design notes say no timer is invented, and the trade now
re-arms at `ceiling - load` rather than at max_w, which is what learning from a
refusal means when the refusal is a measurement.
THE REGRESSION IS THE LOOP SETTLING, NOT A UNIT TEST ON decide().
test_arbitrage.py 3c closes the loop over the shipped guard, strategy, arbiter,
control law and QuarterAverager with a modelled plant, and asserts BOTH
directions: unsized it must run away (24 onsets, -414..+3200 W, a quarter over
the cap) and sized it must settle (1 onset, 303 W swing, three quarters at
exactly 1500.0 W). The two runs differ in one argument. A third pair asserts the
card is INERT where the defect is inert.
Evidence: 29/29 green. 14 mutations, every one RED on a named check, no
survivors; two are ZERO BYTES - `min()` -> `max()` on the sizing, and the
sized-trade sentence's two operands transposed - and both are red. M13 reverts
the 2026-08-20 rung and is red on EIGHT named checks in test_peakguard and three
in test_arbitrage. Every revert verified by a tree fingerprint AFTER the revert,
which is how a defect in the battery's own harness was found: two edits to one
file, restored in list order, left the first one on disk (MUTATION.md habit 18).
test_peakguard.py part 1 also gained a None-safe format, because the mutation it
exists to catch made it raise TypeError one line later and ABORT the file -
parts 2-13 were ungraded and M13's recorded coverage was one check instead of
eight.
Not fixed, and named: TEST-23 finding 1's export overshoot at the END of a trade
(356-938 W, ~0.37 x max_w) is a different card; a house whose load ALONE exceeds
the cap still has the trade refused outright and the loop drive to grid = 0
rather than to the ceiling, and no swept pair reaches that regime; the container
leg (hadrive.py) was not re-run because test23s3-addon is deliberately stopped
as a second writer on the setpoint entity.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
adminandClaude Opus 5.5