0ef9565071597bf40e62fe7bffc75294b565a105
72
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
  adminandClaude Opus 5
|
0ef9565071 |
TEL-12: several PV inverters, and one absent member is an absent TOTAL
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m59s
0.11.0 shipped `pv_entity` as a single string. The reference site's owner reported within minutes of it going live that they have several PV inverters and could configure one - which is ordinary for a multi-string roof, not a property of one house. `pv_entities` is the roster and the row carries the SITE total. ⚠️ THE HARD PART IS ABSENCE, NOT THE LIST. Three configured, one `unavailable`, and the sum of the other two is a SMALLER NUMBER INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM A REAL ONE. Read back by OPT-10 that says "there was less PV than there was" - the "no irradiance" conclusion the channel exists to TEST. So `pv.total()` answers `None` the moment any configured entity is absent: the topic carries HA's own `None`, the entity goes to `unknown`, the recorder records a GAP. The alternative (the partial sum beside a contributor count) was implemented and run as mutation N1b; it loses because the MQTT row is read COLD a week later by an attribution that would believe it, while the qualifying count would live in a second entity with its own history. The partial information is not thrown away - the STATUS PAGE names every entity that reported, with its watts, and every one that did not, with its reason, because that surface is read LIVE by a human who wants the diagnostic. ⚠️ AND THE MIRROR: a member honestly reporting 0 W is SUMMED. The test is `is None`, never falsiness - a roster that blanked the site on a zero would report an absence on every clear evening. THE SURFACE IS MEASURED, NOT PREFERRED. `pv_entity` could not become a list: tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py §G shows Supervisor 2026.08.0 answering an 0.11.0 install's stored string with `Invalid list for option 'pv_entity'`, and deepmerge's list strategy is `override` so a `[]` default does not rescue it - the live add-on would not start. `match(.*)?` does accept both shapes and is rejected for a different, measured reason: it validates nothing (a string, a list and the integer 417 all pass) and renders as a plain text box. So `pv_entities` joins `pv_entity` and REPLACES it when set, CFG-04's rule for `inverters:`, with a status caution saying which key won - a union would double-count the inverter the old key still names. STILL NOT A CONTROL INPUT. tools/tel11_pv_trace.py was extended rather than replaced and now grades five claims over three document sets. The control hash is UNMOVED - 846a10a5b89e… on `unset` and on `one`, on both trees - and the roster control document is byte-identical between the two trees. 2/5 is a claim TEL-11 could not make: with 0.11.0 as the baseline, "one entity behaves exactly as 0.11.0 does" is a real cross-tree identity over control AND telemetry. ⚠️ TEL-11's OWN `--compare` REFUSAL HAD TO CHANGE, and that is MUTATION.md habit 24: a discriminator defined as "the baseline lacks this feature" dies on the release that ships the feature, and dies as a false refusal. Twelve mutations, each on a fresh purged `cp -a`, no survivors. N5 is +0 B (`sum` -> `max`, the same three characters) and was run on a fresh copy with `cmp` confirming the edit on disk. The fixture is three distinct NON-ZERO contributions in two units with absence driven at EVERY position - a member contributing 0 W could go absent without moving the sum of the rest, which is habit 23 with a coinciding value in the arithmetic rather than in the plant. 31/31 in the CI image. Not deployable as merged: config.yaml stays at 0.11.0, so predeploy_check.py reports a NO-OP until PKG cuts a version. A CHANGELOG entry is wanted and deliberately not written - 11b forbids `## Unreleased` and the bump is PKG's call; DECISIONS/TEL-12-several-pv-inverters.md is the material it needs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
07ba3433ed |
TEL-11: PV production stops being invisible, and stays out of the control law
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 8m6s
OPT-10 measured that this site's pack reaches 90 % SoC on 2 days of 16 and that
20.5 kWh of surplus left the site while the pack had room - 12.6 kWh of it with
the battery not charging at all - and could not say WHY, because PV production
is recorded NOWHERE. Three causes need three different fixes (no irradiance:
nothing to fix; a charge-power limit; the optimiser declining to charge, which
is the only software defect) and guessing between them is how an optimiser gets
tuned to solve a cloud problem. This card adds the channel. It does not do the
attribution.
AN HA ENTITY, NOT A REGISTER, AND THAT IS A PRODUCT DECISION. This add-on's
RS485 bus carries the BATTERY inverter it drives; a household's PV inverter is
normally a different box from a different vendor reporting into Home Assistant
through its own integration. `pv_entity` takes whatever `sensor.*` the site's
own PV integration provides, any brand HA can read.
POSITIVE IS PRODUCTION, AND THERE IS NO `pv_invert`. The convention is derived
rather than assumed: `meter_entity` is positive when IMPORTING and `batt_entity`
is positive when DISCHARGING (DOCS.md, Sources), both of which are "power
arriving at the house's AC bus", and production arrives there too. Those two
keys carry invert flags because they are BIPOLAR and are READ BY THE CONTROL
PATH - `inv.batt` feeds SAFETY-30's per-unit sign check and SAFETY-31's
circulating-power sensor, so a reversed sensor hands the site a plausible number
it acts on. Production is unipolar and is read by nothing: a reversed sensor
announces itself as -4 kW at noon in the very history this card creates, and a
flag would only let an installer hide it. No negative-value alarm either - a PV
inverter's own standby draw makes a small negative reading at night ordinary, so
any threshold would be a number nobody measured.
ABSENCE IS NEVER ZERO, AND "DROPPED" IS NOT ABSENT. `publish()` SKIPS a None,
which is right for `circulation` and exactly wrong here: a skipped row leaves
Home Assistant holding the last number forever and the recorder draws a FLAT
LINE through the outage, which is indistinguishable from a measurement and
manufactures the "there was no surplus" conclusion this card exists to TEST. So
the absence is published, with HA's own payload: `mqtt/const.py` declares
`PAYLOAD_NONE = "None"` and `mqtt/sensor.py` tests it BEFORE the numeric branch,
so the entity's state becomes `unknown` and the recorder stores a GAP. Read out
of home-assistant/core `dev` on 2026-09-24 and quoted at the constant.
`ABSENT_AS_UNKNOWN` is a one-key set and the suite asserts `circulation: None`
is STILL dropped.
THE UNIT IS READ OFF THE ENTITY. `mW`, `W`, `kW`, `MW`, `GW`, `TW` - HA's own
`UnitOfPower`, every factor an exact power of ten. A sensor with no unit, or a
unit outside that table, is REFUSED by name and the status page says which.
`read_inputs()`'s `abs(raw) < 50` kW-or-W guess is safe for a quarter-hour
demand forecast and is NOT safe here: 30 W of dusk is an ordinary reading and
that heuristic would publish it as 30 kW.
GENUINELY OPTIONAL, AND NOT A SECOND `price_now_entity`. validate.py does not
mention the key - it cannot conflict with anything, because nothing else reads
it. The MQTT row lives in a new `OPTIONAL_SENSORS` list whose `include` argument
DEFAULTS TO EMPTY, so every caller that has never heard of `pv_entity` -
test_mqtt.py's fixtures, tools/rehearse_roster.py, anything written next year -
announces exactly what it announced before. Unset: no state call at all, no
entity, no topic, no status row, no page row. Set and failing: a CAUTION
(`ok=False, warn=True`), never a `bad` row, so a telemetry channel can never put
a battery site into NOT READY.
IT MUST NOT BECOME A CONTROL INPUT, AND THAT IS GRADED TWICE. `test_pv.py`
part 6 drives 40 cycles of the real `cycle()` and asserts the commands are
bit-identical across unset / no reading / 0 W / 8 kW, with a COMPUTED census
(33 modules under app/) showing the material is mentioned in exactly three:
pv.py, main.py, mqtt.py. `tools/tel11_pv_trace.py` is the cross-tree half -
`safety56_behaviour_trace.py`'s pattern with a DIFFERENT control clause, because
this card's claim is that nothing differs rather than that only sentences do: it
REFUSES unless the two `app/` fingerprints differ and unless exactly one side
reacts to the option. Measured on 41 stimulus cells:
control release/1.0 unset 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
control TEL-11 unset 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
control TEL-11 set 846a10a5b89e321086d535825925721e2f791012e8405948d4fd38d3f9d0be5f
telemetry release/1.0 unset a443a6ceaffe072b44bcd5f2ad946c1ed6c9e01b69e278eca631f7f4d7892164
telemetry TEL-11 unset a443a6ceaffe072b44bcd5f2ad946c1ed6c9e01b69e278eca631f7f4d7892164
telemetry TEL-11 set 4e6d1cb289a957223ad0205f732a6fec6110ce1f2032c98ad60694e67625274f
UNSET is byte-identical in BOTH documents, which is stronger than "the control
path is untouched": an install that does not set the option sees no change of
any kind, announcement and status rows included.
⚠️ AND THE CARD'S CENTRAL MUTATION WAS A SURVIVOR ON THE FIRST BATTERY.
`self.grid -= self.pv_w` in `read_inputs()` - +106 B, on disk, purged, genuinely
running - came back GREEN, because the fixture drove a 6 kW export over 12
cycles, which puts the loop AGAINST ITS RAIL: a command moving `slew_w` every
cycle produces the same ramp for -6000 W and for -14 000 W of apparent error.
MUTATION.md habit 23 with a saturated ACTUATOR in place of a coinciding value,
and it is in that file now as the habit's second instance. The fixture now
drives a 600 W import the loop SETTLES on, against a responsive meter, and asks
habit 23's own question as its own check: shift the METER by the same 8 kW and
confirm the commands really would have moved.
Evidence: 31/31 suites green in the CI image, checks.yml's exact command, purged
tree, `:ro`. Ten mutations, NO survivors, each on its own `cp -a` of the tree so
habit 18's revert hazard is closed by construction - table in
`DECISIONS/TEL-11-pv-production.md` §7 with byte deltas and sha256s.
⚠️ THIS IS A RUNTIME CHANGE BEHIND AN UNCHANGED VERSION, AND
`tools/predeploy_check.py` WILL REFUSE IT. `app/`, `config.yaml` and
`translations/` are all in its `RUNTIME` tuple and `config.yaml` still reads
0.10.1, so the gate reports a NO-OP deploy until a version is cut. That is PKG's
call and this card does not take it.
No CHANGELOG section: `test_version_gate.py` 11b refuses a newest `## ` heading
that is not config.yaml's `version:`, and opening one would mean taking that
same packaging decision. The operator account is in DOCS.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
8a6acd9fa2 |
SAFETY-56: the gate cannot tell a dead register from a pack that cannot comply, so stop saying it can
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 8m0s
Text only. No behaviour change - same conjunction, same limits, same MISSING, same 0 W, same NOT READY. `tools/safety56_behaviour_trace.py` says so: 2390 capture reads, a 66-cell swept grid, and six driven controller worlds produce the byte-identical document `6030175e...` on origin/release/1.0 and on this branch, while the sentences differ. THE DEFECT. SAFETY-37's conjunction is satisfied by two disjoint worlds - the register has stopped reporting reality, or the SOURCE cannot comply with the command - and nothing `freshness.py` is handed separates them. Three sentences asserted the first. On the live 2026-09-21 episode it was the second: the pack read 11 % for the whole 850 s hold, every command in that hold was a discharge, and the register answered the first CHARGE command three seconds later. The readiness row was worse still, because it asserted a false fact about a NAMED entity that was present, numeric and updating - so the operator opened Developer Tools, found it working, and had every reason to conclude the diagnostics were broken. THE FIX. Each message states what was OBSERVED and names BOTH explanations. Three wordings, no shared helper: two are a log line about a behaviour, the third is a banner about an entity, and a helper serving both would drop whichever half the other caller does not need. SoC stays STATED, NOT WIRED - part 11b drives the two worlds at 50 % and 11 % and the sentence does not move one byte. The row does not branch on `batt_fresh.stale` either: `stale_note()` already rides `liveness_notes()` a few rows below, so the discriminator is "is that row there?", and part 11d asserts it is present in one world and absent in the other. THE CHECKS. test_freshness.py part 11 builds the pair of worlds with ground truth written down rather than derived from the published stream, asserts they are really two (40 of 40 reads differ) while the published stream is bit-identical, and only then grades the sentences. Eleven mutations, all red: each of the three sentences reverted (3, 2 and 2 named reds), the two explanations transposed at ZERO bytes (1), the second explanation deleted (1), the admission of ambiguity replaced by a ranking (1), all three reverted at once (5), and two aimed at this card's own check - collapsing the world pair (2) and emptying the accusation list, which a positive control against the three sentences as 0.10.1 shipped them catches (1). AND TWO OF THE ELEVEN FOUND DEFECTS IN THE CHECK RATHER THAN IN THE CODE. Transposing `label` and `entity` in the row made it unfindable and the run died on an IndexError - a red with no name and every later check ungraded, FCST-06's shape exactly; `_s56_row()` returns a named absence now, 0 named reds before, 3 after. And the first invariance run compared a tree with itself, because it archived a branch whose edits were not committed yet; the tool now REFUSES to report "behaviour unchanged" unless the sentences halves differ, and both of its refusals are driven. SAFETY-57's part 10h check was the handoff and is inverted rather than deleted: it required the accusation to still be present so that removing it had to be a deliberate act. This is that act. Its escape clause is untouched. Suite: 30/30 in the CI image, checks.yml's exact command, purged tree, :ro. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
43c144b8d9 |
SAFETY-57: the stale-reading verdict gets an exit, because its own consequence is what stopped it being tested
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m58s
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
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
b548525d10 |
TEL-10: the loop's integrator stops being invisible
`self.i_w` has been a separate quantity from the command since SAFETY-04 and has left the process nowhere at all - no entity, no MQTT attribute, no log line. The investigation behind SAFETY-48 could only RECONSTRUCT it from the grid trace plus a replay; the reconstruction reproduced about a third of the engagements it was checked against and was discarded, so the card it was gathered for had to be argued from a measurement nobody could stand behind. It could not have been made to work either: `i_w` depends on every cycle before it, including the ones where the arbiter overrode the loop and `main.py` re-seeded `self.i_w = self.target`, and that re-seed is invisible in the grid trace. THREE SITE ROWS, APPENDED AFTER release/1.0's EIGHT. `loop_i` is `Decision.i_w` - the accumulator after the cycle, before the output clamp, the slew limit and quantisation. `loop_lead` is `decision.i_w - prev_w` against the command `compute()` was HANDED, which is not a subtraction of the other two published rows: `Setpoint` is the arbiter's output and is this cycle's, so on any cycle the arbiter overrode the loop the two differ - and that is exactly the cycle on which the integrator was re-seeded. `loop_reason` is `compute()`'s own word; the arbiter's `explain()` prints the winning claim's NAME and has never carried the claim's reason, so `slew-limited` appears in neither the `Why` row nor `Controller status`. Measured on the same cycle: arbiter `'loop -> -5000 W'`, loop `'i-clamped'`. NOTHING IN THE CONTROL PATH MOVED. `app/control.py` is not in this diff. `compute()`, its returned `Decision` and every constant it reads are identical to release/1.0, and all nine of release/1.0's retained discovery messages are byte-identical and still FIRST in the announcement. Evidence: 30/30 suites green in the CI image. Nine mutations, ONE survivor, reported as one: `decision.i_w - self.target` for the lead is +2 B and green because `cycle()` has not reassigned `self.target` at that line - the name is kept for the coupling, not for a behaviour it buys, and M2b (+8 B) is the mutation that does change the value and is red. AND TWO OF THIS CARD'S OWN CHECKS COULD NOT REACH THE FAILURE THEY NAMED. "the published integrator reaches its bound" was GREEN under the card's named mutation (publish `prev_w`, -3 B), because the command reaches the bound too - twelve cycles later. It asserts the LEAD TIME now and is red on 5. "a stopped controller publishes not-running" was GREEN under deleting that branch's assignments (-45 B, -67 B), because the fixture STARTED stopped and `__init__` writes the same values; it stops the controller part-way through a run that has already wound the integrator to -5000 W. Both are MUTATION.md habit 4, found by the battery rather than by review. No CHANGELOG section: `test_version_gate.py` 11b refuses a newest `## ` heading that is not config.yaml's `version:`, and opening one would mean taking a packaging decision this card does not get to take. The operator account is in DOCS.md and the release note belongs to the next PKG ticket. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e3ccd9f6ea |
SAFETY-47: what a shadow run can show, and the watts on its status row
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m48s
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
|
||
|
Claude
|
8fa4febfef |
SAFETY-10: the whole decision path runs and nothing reaches the inverter
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m58s
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 |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e1b9254626 |
SAFETY-45: a price-driven charge is SIZED by the capacity guard, not switched by it
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m42s
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 |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
610725bed9 |
TARIFF-11: the plan's account of itself, corrected and put on the page
Four defects of one shape - the add-on's report of its own tariff plan was wrong, always in the direction that flattered it - and one check, which is the deliverable. 1. `TariffPlan.words` counted POINTS and called them HOURS. The live add-on logged `dynamic_dayahead from generic_dayahead, 132 h` for 132 quarter-hourly points = 33 hours. Belgium moved to a 15-minute MTU on 2025-10-01, so this was wrong every time it was printed, and NOT by a constant factor: a 40-hour soak measured 1.79x .. 5.33x, because §8.3's carried points are hourly while the firm ones are quarter-hourly. `words` now reports both quantities, plus the firm/carried split and the spacing, in FCST-04's *Price history* wording so the two rows can be compared. 2. §8.3's firm-pair refusal and the flat-tariff refusal did the same, and they reach an operator through `self.arb.explain()`. This is exactly the point<->hour conflation TARIFF-14 removed from `at()`, left standing in the prose. `price_forecast.py`'s §8.3 carry-forward log line carried the third instance - a carried-HOUR count over a POINT count - and DOCS quotes it verbatim, so it is corrected here too. 3. The plan reached no HTTP surface at all. `rows["Tariff"]` was `static_status()`'s 30 s-tick sentence and never saw the provider plan - it read 'no static profile' at all 802 soak samples on a site whose feed was answering. It now carries the plan's shape. ⚠️ The two sources are kept distinguishable: the plan half is stamped with its own age, measured from `tariff_at`, because it can be up to TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S (5400 s) old. FCST-04 pins that row to DOCS as a pair; DOCS moves in this commit. 4. `main.py`'s "if and only if" was false. `cycle()` returns at the input hold before `self.arb = None`, so an armed site read `off (arbitrage_enabled)` - naming an option that is on - and, after one completed cycle, showed a decision up to 15 s stale as a current one. The row now reads the OPTION and separates three facts; `cycle_at` and `arb_at` make "this cycle reached no decision" an observation. THE DELIVERABLE IS THE CHECK. All four survived 29 green suites because nothing graded the strings a human is shown. `test_price.py` section 12 renders through the shipped `status_payload()`, parses each number out of its OWN SLOT and compares it against a figure computed from the fixture's construction parameters - not from the property the row was built out of (habit 4), and not as a substring of a sentence the same file wrote (habit 14). The fixture set is four plan shapes and the check computes and prints the field pairs no fixture separates. The *Arbitrage* row's states are driven through real cycles with a sensor answering None and graded by INEQUALITY. No behaviour changed: no threshold, refusal rung, claim or setpoint moved. MUTATIONS: 16, no survivors, one at +0 B (the risky delta) and red. Two were found by the battery INSIDE THIS CARD'S OWN CHECK: a -190 B survivor whose fixture varied two things at once (habit 4), and a mutation whose red was a TRACEBACK in an f-string operand and therefore named nothing (FCST-06). Both closed; the table is on the PR. All 29 test files green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
Claude
|
f5ea39784d |
Merge release/1.0 (TARIFF-10) into TARIFF-12
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m16s
CHANGELOG.md was the only conflict: both entries belong under the same
`## Unreleased` heading, TARIFF-10's first because it merged first. No
version number picked.
app/main.py auto-merged, and was re-read because of it. TARIFF-10 changed
WHICH installs run `run_tariff_refresh()` (`arbitrage.enabled(opts)` ->
`tariff_refresh_wanted(opts)`); this card changed what that task does on
a failed fetch. Nothing in the keep/replace reasoning changed, and the
two newly reachable configurations are now DRIVEN in test_arbitrage.py
8b rather than reasoned about:
* a provider configured with trading DISARMED is the case the guard
was designed for, and needs no second fixture because nothing on
this path reads `arbitrage_enabled` at all - asserted over the AST's
symbols and non-docstring constants, after two drafts of that check
went red on a CORRECT tree for matching the word "arbitrage" in a
docstring and in a log line;
* `price_provider: off` + a `static_profile` resolves to the
CONFIGURED product (`origin: "static"`), so `standing.from_feed` is
false on every refresh and the guard never latches - driven twice in
a row, because a guard that latched there would freeze a static
site's plan at its first window for the life of the install.
Also: the kept-plan log line said "arbitrage stops with it", which after
TARIFF-10 is false on a site that fetches without trading; it now says
"arbitrage, where it is armed, stops with it". The keep decision is
strictly downstream of `resolve_tariff()`, so the §8.3 carry into
price_history - TARIFF-10's whole point - is unaffected either way.
All 29 suites green on the merged tree, including TARIFF-10's new
test_price.py section 13. All eleven mutations RE-DRIVEN on the merged
tree rather than carried over: eleven red, no survivors, every revert
fingerprinted. M11 is new - making the guard conditional on
`arbitrage.enabled(self.o)` (+86 B) is red on five named checks.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
Claude
|
c81289527f |
TARIFF-12: a returned degradation is not a refresh
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m12s
`run_tariff_refresh()` promised in its own docstring that "a failure does not clear the plan", and enforced it with `except Exception` - a branch a supplier outage never reaches. `load_prices()` states the reason in its own words: it "RETURNS, NEVER RAISES, for every failure a site can actually have", because a degradation arriving as a traceback into the planning tick would stop the controller regulating over an expired certificate. So a dead feed RETURNS a §11.4 plan, the `try` succeeds, and the assignment below it overwrote the good plan unconditionally. With `static_profile` unset - the shipped default, and the normal state of a dynamic-tariff site - `_degrade()` returns `TariffPlan(no_data, None, "none")`: a complete 48-hour plan replaced by nothing, at the FIRST failed fetch, ~27 minutes after the last good one. `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` (5400 s) never governed anything and there was no serve-stale window at all. Fourth card in one family: FCST-04's M4 (`not ok` only), FCST-05's HIGH (`(JSONDecodeError, OSError)` only), FCST-06 (`not self.ok` only), and now `except Exception` only, for a path that never raises. The question is now asked once, after the attempt, from the evidence that exists - FCST-06's answer, one module over. The evidence is `TariffPlan.from_feed` (did this resolution observe the configured feed) and the shipped `fresh_tariff_plan()`, reused rather than transcribed. A degradation replaces a standing observation only once that observation has aged out, so `TARIFF_MAX_AGE_S` is now the serve-stale window it reads like. A §11.4 static fallback does not replace a fresh provider plan either, although it carries real prices: every point `_degrade()` builds is `provisional=True`, so `firm_points()` is empty, `arbitrage()` refuses and `cheap_now()` is False - everything a consumer may act on is already off - while a day-ahead price for a given hour does not change once published. The rule is deliberately not symmetrical: a standing plan that is itself a degradation IS replaced, or an outage would freeze the operator's static profile at the window it was first generated for. `tariff_at` does not move on a kept plan. It is the moment of the fetch that produced the plan standing, `fresh_tariff_plan()` judges the age from it, and an unmoved timestamp is the only thing that tells a kept plan from a freshly fetched one. test_arbitrage.py section 8b drives the whole chain with nothing stubbed but the socket: the transport raises the way aiohttp does, load_prices() returns no_data, _degrade() builds the §11.4 plan, and the shipped run_tariff_refresh() decides. A check that patched resolve_tariff to RAISE would have passed against the defect. Ten mutations, ten reds, no survivors; 29/29 suites green. Out of scope and unchanged: the persisted price store still does not back the plan during an outage (FCST-03), and the status banner and the Arbitrage row's lag are separately carded. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
e6c45a61e7 |
TARIFF-10: configuring a price provider is what fetches prices
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m19s
amain() started the background tariff refresh only when arbitrage_enabled was
on, and that option ships false. run_tariff_refresh is the only caller of
resolve_tariff(), which is the only caller of price_history.carry() - so on a
shipped install with a price provider configured nothing was ever fetched: no
plan resolved, /data/price_history.json never created, the Price history status
row reading `empty` for the life of the install, and TARIFF-09's short-horizon
warning unable to fire because there was no fetch to warn about. Measured over
a 40 h two-instance soak on one feed: 0 requests and `present: false` across all
802 samples, against a resolved 132-point plan on the instance with arbitrage
armed.
git log -S puts the refresh task, its arbitrage.enabled() guard AND the DOCS.md
sentence saying a configured provider still fetches in the same commit - OPT-04,
bdd7f18; config.yaml has carried the claim since TARIFF-02,
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
b59f5ce31b |
FCST-04: the carry-forward stops decimating a quarter-hourly feed, and a broken cache stops stopping the add-on
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m22s
Rework of the FCST-04 branch against review. Every finding below was proven by a runnable script before it was touched and re-run after; every check added or repaired was driven red by a mutation, `__pycache__` purged first (MUTATION.md, TEST-15). 29/29 test files green. ⚠️ H1 - A SUB-HOURLY FEED WAS DECIMATED TO ONE POINT AN HOUR, AND THE SPREAD WENT WITH IT. `fill_from_yesterday()` keyed the published set as `{_utc_hour(p.start): p for p in r.points}` - LAST POINT OF THE HOUR WINS, the other three dropped. `eneco_eddy` is the Belgian imbalance product and settles per QUARTER, and `_validate_raw()` accepts any strictly-increasing spacing, so this is a shape the product supports today. Measured on a 96-point quarter-hourly feed - ALL FIRM, FULLY PUBLISHED, nothing to carry: the plan reached the optimiser as 15 points, the arbitrage spread fell from 0.143 to 0.014 EUR/kWh, and the cheapest "hour" became a `:45` point whose `at()` window runs into the next one. Not the windowing effect this card is about; a feed losing 84 % of its own prints, with no flag anywhere reporting it. The fill now decides only WHICH WHOLE HOURS NEED CARRYING: every published point inside the window passes through BY IDENTITY, and a carried point is added only for a whole hour with no published coverage at all. Same feed, same fixture: 60 of 60 firm points kept, spread 0.134 over the hours still ahead. ⚠️ AND `_audit()` GOT STRICTER, NOT LOOSER - that was the condition on doing it at all. The old post-condition refused any repeated `_utc_hour`, a count that cannot express four points in one hour. Two rules replace it and SUBSUME it: a published point must BE one of that hour's published points by identity and may be emitted only once; a carried point may stand only in an hour absent from the published set, must be flagged True, and may not repeat. So the duplicated carried hour it existed to catch still raises, the same published point emitted twice now raises, and a carried point sharing an hour with a real print now raises too - which the count never looked at. Three mutations, three reds. ⚠️ H2 - A DAY RECORD THAT WAS NOT A RECORD STOPPED THE ADD-ON FROM STARTING. `_load()` validated `version` and that `days` is a dict, never that each VALUE is one. `{"version": 1, "days": {"2026-01-14": "oops"}}` loaded as ok=True, last_error=None, and then `rec.get(...)` raised AttributeError out of `words`, `yesterday()` and `resolve_tariff()` alike. `PriceHistory(...)` and `.words` are both unguarded in `Controller.__init__`, so the controller did not come up - and it never self-healed, because `_remember()` raised on the same record before it could reach `_save()`. That falsifies the CHANGELOG's "A BROKEN CACHE IS NOT A BROKEN CONTROLLER" in the one direction that matters. The asymmetry that produced it is visible in the file: `_parse_points()` is carefully defensive about every field of a POINT and `_load()` was not defensive about the record holding them. Unusable records are now dropped and REPORTED (`words` says how many and why), and `words` is total by construction as a second line. M3 - `yesterday()` WAS OFF BY ONE DAY FOR 00:00-00:59 AFTER SPRING-FORWARD. `brussels()` renders at the FIXED offset for that instant, so `brussels(stamp) - timedelta(days=1)` subtracts 24 ABSOLUTE hours - and the Brussels day before the March transition is 23 hours long. At 2026-03-30T00:30+02:00 it returned 2026-03-28's prices as "yesterday", or `no_data` naming a date that is not yesterday. The arithmetic is now on the local DATE, which has no offset to lose, and both transitions have a check - the module's headline claim had none. M4 - WITH NO /data THE STORE STILL FILLED, IN MEMORY. `_save()` short-circuited on `not ok` while `_remember()` populated `self._days` anyway: `words` said "unavailable" and `yesterday()` answered A SERIES that is gone on the next restart. The module docstring rejects exactly that ("a yesterday that silently forgets") as its reason for not calling makedirs, so the code now matches the docstring rather than contradicting it. M5 - THE PRUNE MUTATION SURVIVED BECAUSE THE STIMULUS WAS DEGENERATE. §8's clock-jump check seeded ONE day, so `if len(self._days) <= KEEP_DAYS: return` fired and the body it is named after never ran: pruning by arithmetic against the clock - which empties the store on exactly the morning the fill is for - passed the whole 29-file suite. The fixture is now written to a file and reopened (`_load()` does not prune, which is how a store legitimately holds more than the cap) with KEEP_DAYS + 2 days, and the mutant is red. M6 - THE AST ORDERING CHECK COULD NOT CATCH A REVERSAL, AND TWO DOCUMENTS CITED IT AS A GUARANTEE. `_calls.index("_remember") < _calls.index("yesterday")` grades `ast.walk` BFS DEPTH: `self._remember(...)` is a statement and `self.yesterday(...)` is an ARGUMENT of the fill, one level deeper, so `_remember` came out first whichever statement was written first - shipped and reversed both scored True. It is now line numbers AND, the half that matters, the behaviour: a feed carrying yesterday alongside today into an EMPTY store must fill the whole horizon; reversed, the lookup finds nothing and the plan is only the published hours. Reversing the two statements is red on both. L14/L9 - KEEP_DAYS = 3 IS THE STEADY STATE EXACTLY, so a newest-N cap has no slack: a feed publishing to D+2, or ONE stray point in the wrong year - which sorts LAST and can never age out - pushes yesterday out for good. `_prune()` now PINS the two days a lookup can actually ask for on top of the cap. Pinning is additive, so it can only RETAIN and the WITNESS-03 property (nothing is deleted by clock arithmetic) is preserved by construction; `stamp` stops being a dead parameter; the store is bounded at KEEP_DAYS + 2. L8 - the horizon end was not floored while `since` was, so a 48 h request made at any instant off the hour returned 49 points. §1's count was green only because its NOW was exactly :00:00, a shape production never has; the fixture now sits at :17:43. L10 - a failed `_save()` leaked its temp file; at 48 writes a day a persistent write failure leaked 48 inodes a day onto the volume that was already the problem. L15 - `{"version": 1.0}` passed, since `1.0 == 1`. L16 - the `_remember` tree walk scanned `app/*.py` only and matched a bare string; it now parses `app/`, `tools/`, `scenarios/` and `estop/` and looks for the NAME, so a comment does not fail it and a call in `tools/` cannot pass unseen. CLAIM-ACCURACY DEFECTS, WHICH THIS REPO TREATS AS REAL: * L7. DOCS said "*Tariff* on the status page reads `provisional` through the morning". FALSE - `tariff_words` is assigned only from the HA price-entity branch and from `static_status()`, both on the 30 s tick, and the plan's own sentence reaches `_LOG.info`. The doc now says what an operator can see (the Price history row, the Arbitrage row's own refusal sentence, the refresh log line) and a check pins the PAIRING - wiring the plan into the row is fine, correcting the doc is fine, doing one without the other is red. * L11. "fills EVERY unpublished hour" is conditional: a partial yesterday leaves the local hours it never held out of the series (§11.4 for those hours, and `at()` raises rather than answering). Correct behaviour, overclaimed wording, and untested - all three fixed. * L12. DECISIONS §1 leaned on `TariffPlan.cheap_now()`, which has NO PRODUCTION CALLER on the provider plan (`self.cheap` comes from `static_status()`, which builds its own). The conclusion holds on `arbitrage()`'s firm-pair refusal alone, which does reach control; the evidence is now stated at the reach it has. * L13. §1's "passed through by identity" check compared `eur_per_kwh` between two SEPARATE `resolve_tariff()` calls, where `is` could never have held. The value comparison is kept and now says what it grades; identity is graded on a read the file constructs and still holds. * L17. `PriceHistory.words` and the new status row had no check at all - and `words` is one of the two things H2 crashed. Both now have one. * L18. main.py's inline note carried the "widens what the optimiser can SEE, never what it may act on" guarantee without the windowing caveat that the CHANGELOG, DOCS and `resolve_tariff()`'s docstring all carry. It is the one place a maintainer reads it unqualified. EVIDENCE. All eight reviewer proofs re-run: p1/p1b return 29 March, p4 keeps 60 of 60 firm points at spread 0.134, p5 starts and reports, p6 D leaves no temp, p6 E refuses 1.0, p6 F records nothing, p7 returns 48 for 48. p2's script still scores True/True because it re-implements the OLD algorithm - the reversal is now driven as a mutation instead, and is red. p3's script always showed the shipped code correct; what was wrong was the fixture, and its mutant is now red. Twenty mutations driven, no survivors, tree fingerprinted and `__pycache__` purged before each: decimation (2 suites red), audit x3, unfloored `until` (2), unvalidated day records (7 checks), instant-subtraction yesterday, in-memory fill on a volume-less store, clock-arithmetic prune, cap without the pin, leaked temp, loose schema type, empty `words` (5), reversed `carry()` (2), a `_remember` leak in tools/ spelled two ways, a neighbour-filling fallback, a copy instead of identity (2), the DOCS claim in both directions, and the caveat removed from main.py. Baseline and the unmutated tree both green. No option added, config.yaml untouched, and the CHANGELOG entry still picks no version: PKG-07's rule, and only the deployer knows whether 0.9.0's image has been pulled. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
0618194d9c |
FCST-04: the carry-forward fill reaches the plan, and the day it carries survives a restart
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m11s
FCST-03 shipped `fill_from_yesterday()` complete and checked, and shipped the consumers written for it - `TariffPlan.firm_points()`, `cheap_now()`'s refusal of a provisional hour, and `arbitrage()`'s refusal 3, which drops provisional hours from the trade set rather than refusing the whole series. It shipped NO CALLER. Nothing in `app/` named the fill, so no series ever contained a carried point and every one of those consumers was exercising its all-firm branch. ⚠️ THE DEFECT THAT PRODUCED WAS NOT AN ERROR ANYWHERE. `load_prices()` returns what the feed published and nothing widened it to the requested horizon, so on a dynamic site between midnight and the 14-16 h CET publication the plan covered the rest of today and nothing more - measured on the fixture here, 24 h against a 48 h request. `arbitrage()` then took `max - min` over that truncated window and reported a spread. The number was real, the window was half the one configured, and nothing said so: tomorrow evening's peak, the hour a morning charge would be sold into, was not in the series to be compared against anything. A missing hour is not a wrong price - it is an hour the optimiser never learns exists. WHAT THIS ADDS. `app/price_history.py` keeps the PUBLISHED prices of the last KEEP_DAYS Brussels days in /data/price_history.json; `resolve_tariff()` gains a required keyword-only `history` and fills every unpublished hour of the horizon from yesterday's same-wall-clock hour, flagged. Persistence rather than a variable on the refresh task, because the window the fill exists for is midnight -> publication and an add-on restarted at 08:00 would otherwise spend all of it on the truncated series. Not in state.json: the refresh runs every 1800 s and that file holds the maintenance history and SAFETY-02's latch. ⚠️ ONE CHANGE HERE MOVES ENERGY, AND IT IS NOT THE ONE THE CARD IS NAMED FOR. Carried hours are provisional, so §8.3 keeps them out of the trade set: the fill widens what the optimiser can SEE, never what it may DO, and test_price_history.py checks that so it cannot be overclaimed later. What does change a trade is that the filled series is windowed to [since, until), so hours that have ALREADY ELAPSED are no longer in the spread. Before, a cheap night that had gone sat in the series as the day's cheapest hour - and a cycle cannot buy in an hour that is past, so the trade was quietly never taken. Section 2 grades this by finding the cheapest firm hour with and without the fill and showing it MOVES, from 02:00 UTC to 08:00 UTC on the fixture. ⚠️ A DEAD FEED IS STILL §11.4, NOT YESTERDAY. The fill runs only on a `series` read. The two are indistinguishable to the optimiser - both 100 % provisional, so arbitrage refuses on the firm-pair rung and `cheap_now()` is False - so preferring yesterday's feed over the `static_profile` an operator configured FOR that case would change a documented degradation for a difference only the status page can see. That, and two more, in DECISIONS/FCST-04-the-day-that-is-carried.md. ⚠️ THE ANTI-DECAY RULE IS AN ORDERING, NOT A VALIDATION, and saying so is more useful than a guarantee that would not hold. Feeding the filled series back in is how this rots - day 2 carries day 1's guesses, day 3 carries day 2's carry of them, behind a `provisional` flag that stays TRUE while the NUMBER decays. No value-level check can catch it: a carried point and `eneco_eddy`'s published-provisional quarter are the same three fields with the same flag. So `carry()` is the only public entry, it records BEFORE it fills, the filled series exists only as a return value the object never sees again, and test_price_history.py walks app/ for any other module naming `_remember` and reads `carry()`'s AST to pin the order. EVIDENCE. 29/29 test files pass in the CI image. Eight mutations driven against app/price_history.py and app/static_tariff.py, __pycache__ purged before each run per MUTATION.md/TEST-15: newest-record lookup (5 red), recording the filled series (1), replace-instead-of-merge (10), UTC-date keying (10), removing the fill call entirely (12), a lost price field defaulting to 0.0 (2), prune by clock arithmetic (1), a degraded reason that stops naming its cause (1). No survivors; baseline and revert both green. Three of those first crashed the harness instead of reporting a FAIL - "it was refused" and "it broke on the way to being refused" must not grade the same - so `why()` and `_priced()` were added and the run repeated. No option added, config.yaml untouched, and the CHANGELOG entry deliberately picks no version: PKG-07's rule, and only the deployer knows whether 0.9.0's image has been pulled. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
f6d7bfcb04 |
SAFETY-44: give the moved-not-lost branch a control that reaches it, and make the move injective
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 7m38s
⚠️ THE CONTROL I WROTE LAST ROUND WAS INERT, AND REVIEW MEASURED IT. M12 ran its
mutant over `state-legacy.json` and the findings diff against the UNMUTATED tree
was EMPTY. It "passed" because that fixture's STAGED leg is already exit 1 on
pre-existing litter, and `"migrated unit/shed/" not in out` was trivially true
because a pre-DEV-02 FLAT store has no shed latch to lose - after migration only
the FIRST roster entry is ever latched.
The decisive measurement is the one it could not make: reverting the
`vanished_unit not in after.units` narrowing - restoring exactly the rule that
hides a real latch loss - left 28/28 GREEN.
⚠️ SO IT WAS HABIT 4 WEARING THE CLOTHES OF ITS OWN FIX, AND WORSE THAN THE
"NO CONTROL" IT REPLACED, because it reads as checked. That is this commit's
own argument about the M3 mis-citation, turned on the thing I wrote to answer it.
⭐ THE FIXTURE CAME FIRST THIS TIME. `state-both-latched.json` is a store at
SCHEMA_VERSION with `unit/garage/*` AND `unit/shed/*` both latched by ONE site
event, so the reasons match too - the arrangement in which same-value
suppression is most dangerous, and the one no existing fixture could produce.
M12's mutant then makes ONE roster unit's latch key VANISH while its sibling's
survives at the same value:
shipped tree, both-latched fixture exit 0, no findings
one unit's latch key deleted exit 1, ADDS
VANISHED STORE KEY unit/shed/sign_tripped
narrowing reverted ⚠️ RED (was 28/28 green)
And it asserts the PRECONDITION - the fixture is clean on the shipped tree -
plus that the mutation ADDS findings rather than coinciding with ones the
fixture already had. An empty diff there is exactly what made the last draft
inert, and nothing said so.
⭐ AND THE MOVE IS NOW INJECTIVE, which is the narrower hole review found still
open. `moved_to` is "any machine-read key with the same bare name and the same
value", and `DEFAULTS["sign_tripped"] is False` means `True` is the ONLY
non-default value a latch can hold - so N vanished keys could all claim the SAME
destination, by construction rather than by coincidence. Measured on a rename
carrying `inverter-a` -> `garage` correctly while DROPPING `inverter-b` -> `shed`:
migrated unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped = True -> unit/garage/sign_tripped
migrated unit/inverter-b/sign_tripped = True -> unit/garage/sign_tripped
Zero store-key findings, on a run where `shed` came up UNLATCHED. Two keys
cannot both have become one key. `diff()` claims each destination once.
⚠️ AND THE CHECK FOR IT IS ANCHORED TO A RUN THAT ACTUALLY PRODUCES MIGRATED
LINES. A dedicated mutant was written first and asserted over an EMPTY list -
vacuous, passing, indistinguishable from working, the same defect twice in one
sitting. These fixtures cannot produce two claimants (`migrate_unit_keys()`
moves FLAT keys only, so one flat latch yields one migration), so rather than
build a fiction to grade, injectivity is asserted over part 5's real migrations,
with a PRECONDITION that there are at least two of them. THE TWO-CLAIMANT
ARRANGEMENT IS A STATED RESIDUAL: bounded in `diff()` by construction, not
measured end-to-end.
Finding 4, and my correction to it was also wrong. The comment cited "line 315"
and "two hundred lines below"; the fix I wrote said "~54 lines down", which was
review's distance to the WRONG line, carried to a new referent without
re-measuring - inside the sentence apologising for a wrong number. Recomputed at
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
d1b7e3f113 |
SAFETY-44: decide per key, because one shared flag let an unrelated latch veto the repair
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 6m58s
⚠️ REVIEW DEFEATED THIS CARD'S OWN FIX WITH ONE ADDED KEY, and the project's own instrument agreed on the unmodified tree. The guard classified each key and then wrote ONE site-wide `namespaced_latched` for BOTH "on the roster" and "off-roster but not UNIT_A", so a single latched key belonging to a unit the operator had removed from `inverters:` vetoed the repair of the misdirected `inverter-a` latch beside it. Measured, roster ['garage','shed'], store stamped so the migration fix cannot reach it: sign_tripped + unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped -> [('garage', True), ...] ...AND unit/old-shed/sign_tripped -> ⚠️ [('garage', False), ...] A site DRIVING on a state file that reads `sign_tripped: true` - the sentence in this card's own first paragraph - and `tools/rehearse_roster.py` printed `LATCH CAME UP DISARMED` on it, exit 1, against shipped code. It matters more than a normal hole because this guard is, as main.py says, the ONLY repair path for an install already stamped by 0.9.0. ⚠️ AND IT IS INSTANCE #17 OF HABIT 4, IN THE EXTENSION MUTATION.md ADDED TWO DAYS AGO. The two fixtures written for this card each hold ONE arrangement - `_staged_store` has only `inverter-a`, `_other_store` only `inverter-b` - so the flag was never written twice with opposite intents in a single store. A per-key check whose keys have never disagreed WITHIN ONE STORE is a check over whichever key came last. Three variables now, one per case, and a fixture holding BOTH. Four cases driven: stranded-only repairs, +1 unrelated repairs, +2 repairs, off-roster-only does NOT (which is DEV-02's control, still green). ⭐ AND THE MOVED-NOT-LOST RULE HID A GENUINE LATCH LOSS. The match was bare key plus value over the whole of `machine_read`, with no identity - and `DEFAULTS["sign_tripped"] is False`, so the ONLY non-default value a latch can hold is `True`. Any surviving latched roster unit therefore suppressed any other unit's vanished latch. Review measured a build that drops `unit/shed/sign_*` while `unit/garage/sign_*` survives, both latched by one site event so the reasons matched too: none in LEG SAME-STEP: nothing vanished, nothing stranded ... NO FINDINGS in the rehearsed transitions exit 0 A roster unit's persisted SAFETY-02 latch deleted, transition reported clean. The legitimate case is a RENAME - the key left `inverter-a`, which is not on this roster, and arrived under `garage`, which is - so the vanished key's own unit must be OFF the roster. A key whose unit is still on the roster has not been renamed, it has been lost, and no amount of the same value elsewhere makes that untrue. ⚠️ AND THE BOUND I CITED FOR IT DID NOT EXIST. Both the comment and the last commit message said "what M3 (delete the flat rollback view) measures". M3 is not that mutant - it drops `sign_reason` from `LEGACY_UNIT_KEYS` - and the one I meant, M9, vanishes only FLAT keys, so neither can satisfy the `unit/` gate the rule sits behind. NEITHER EXERCISED THE BRANCH; it had no negative control at all, in a card whose subject is checks that cannot reach the failure they name. A citation is the worst carrier for that, because it reads as having been checked. M12 is written for it and driven: a roster unit that stops restoring its latch is exit 1, and the suppression does not swallow it. `misdirected` IS UNREACHABLE FROM THE CALL SITE, and the claim that it was a benefit is withdrawn rather than restated. `unit` is `roster_names(opts)[0]` and `build_roster()` names its first entry from the same list, so `unit` is a member of `roster` by construction; review measured it - dropping the `roster` argument inside `migrate_unit_keys()` survives 28/28. The argument stays for the reason `_verify_moves()` gives for its own `roster=None` branch, it is what a NEW caller gets - and a guard nothing exercises is a guard nobody knows works, so it is now exercised at the function's own level: a wrong `unit` comes back misdirected, the marker is not stamped, and the same call with a roster name stamps it. Dead `if _roster_names else UNIT_A` removed; `roster_names()` never returns []. THE OPERATOR MESSAGE IS ASSERTED. Review deleted it whole (`if stranded:` -> `if False:`) and 28/28 stayed green - `stranded` had no other consumer, so the list existed only to print a line nothing checked, and that line is the entire operator-facing half of the repair. Now: exactly one SAFETY-44 line at ERROR, naming the stranded key and the roster it was measured against. A wrong line citation removed: the call-site comment said "line 315's comment" and "two hundred lines below", and both were wrong (315 is the CFG-03 defaults note; the comment meant is ~54 lines down). Cite the thing, not its coordinates. ⚠️ AND WHAT 5b/5c ACTUALLY PIN IS RECORDED, because review is owed the distinction: `mutant_tree()` asserts its target exists, so EDITING the guarded line makes the file red at the ANCHOR before any behaviour is measured - which looks identical from the exit code and proves much less. It happened twice while writing this commit. The behavioural coverage lives in test_maintenance.py section 13 and test_inverter.py, which build stores rather than strings. Fixture strings no longer say "measured" - they are synthetic, and the repo's other fixture carries an explicit SYNTHETIC header. 28/28 files pass. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
5e382f52f6 |
SAFETY-44: the latch migration takes the roster, and the guard stops being defeated by the key the defect wrote
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 6m56s
⚠️ A DISARMED SAFETY-02 GUARD ON AN INSTALL WHOSE STATE FILE SAYS IT IS PROTECTED. `Controller.__init__` called `migrate_unit_keys(store, UNIT_A)` - a hardcoded constant - while its sibling `migrate_maint_keys(store, unit, roster)` takes the roster and refuses a write no machine reads. On a store that ran pre-DEV-02 flat and declares `inverters: [garage, shed]`, the latch moved to `unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped`, `_verify_moves()` read it back under the name it had been HANDED, was satisfied, and stamped the marker. Not one inverter came up latched, and the next start skipped the migration too. That is the MAINT-05 defect verbatim, still live in the function whose own docstring describes it, and `_grade_store_migration()` did not catch it: its "is anything namespaced latched" test was satisfied BY THE MISDIRECTED VALUE ITSELF. ⚠️ THE REASON IT WAS LEFT WAS A HALF-TRUTH. "There is no roster yet - the `Inverter`s restore their latch in their constructors." The KEYS must be written before the `Inverter`s read them; the NAMES do not come from the `Inverter`s. `roster_names(opts)` reads them off the options before anything is constructed - which is exactly what it already existed to do for `MqttPublisher` - and returns `[UNIT_A]` on the flat shape, so today's upgrade path is byte-identical. TWO EDITS, AND THEY DO DIFFERENT JOBS. Measured per leg by reverting each one: SAME-STEP leg STAGED leg both edits (shipped) clean latch armed, litter reported guard reverted latch armed ⚠️ DISARMED call site reverted latch armed, litter latch armed, litter So the GUARD carries the safety and the CALL SITE carries the hygiene and the withheld marker. The table is in test_rehearse.py part 5 because a reader who assumed the roster-aware migration re-arms the latch would delete the guard as redundant in a tidy-up and take the STAGED column with it - and STAGED is what "upgrade now, declare the roster later" produces, which is the path an operator actually takes. Only the guard reaches an install already stamped by 0.9.0. ⚠️ AND "OFF THE ROSTER" ALONE WAS TOO BLUNT, WHICH test_inverter.py CAUGHT. The first draft treated every off-roster latch as litter. In DEV-02's restart case the store carries `unit/inverter-b/sign_tripped = True` from B's own trip while the roster being graded holds only A - and the blunt rule re-armed a HEALTHY A off the flat key B's trip had mirrored. DEV-02's defect rebuilt inside its own guard, which is what the paragraph I was overruling had been right to fear. Narrowed to `UNIT_A`, which is the only name the broken migration ever wrote - `roster_names()` falls back to a POSITIONAL `inverter-N`, so `inverter-a` is not a name this code hands to anyone else. A latch stranded under any other name is a real unit out of today's config and still counts as protection. Residual, stated in the code rather than left to be found: a site whose own first unit is NAMED `inverter-a`, latched, then taken out of the roster gets re-armed on `inverters[0]` - a healthy unit held at 0 W until an operator clears it. The conservative direction, against a site DRIVING on a file that says it is latched. ⭐ AND FIXING THE CODE EXPOSED A FALSE POSITIVE IN THE HARNESS. With the latch now landing under `garage`, `rehearse_roster.py` reported VANISHED STORE KEY for `unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped` three lines above the same value sitting under `unit/garage/sign_tripped`. A key that moved to a namespace a machine reads has not vanished - and an alarm that fires on the harmless case is one an operator learns to dismiss before the real one arrives, which is CONTROL-C's own argument. The test is not "the name appears somewhere": same bare key, same value, under a key in `machine_read`, the set built by driving a real start. A latch that genuinely went missing has no such key and is still a finding, which M3 (delete the flat rollback view) still measures red. Test parts replaced deliberately, as both of them asked to be: - test_rehearse.py part 5 asserted the defect "as REQUIREMENTS so that a fix turns them red". It now asserts the fix, with 5b and 5c as negative controls - one per edit - and 5b doubles as the leg-splitter's positive control, since reverting the guard is the build where the two legs DISAGREE. - test_maintenance.py section 13 was headed "RECORDED, NOT FIXED" and said the fixing card "should expect them to go red and should replace them". Replaced, plus two cases it could not have had: the already-stamped store, and the `inverter-b` negative control for the narrowing above. 28/28 files pass. Not run: nothing - this is host-side only, no rig, no hardware. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
f8e501393f |
OPT-09: the weights parameter nothing ever passed, and what it cannot do
`allocator.plan()` has taken a `weights` argument since ALLOC-01 and NOTHING
had ever passed one - main.py called `resolve()` without it and the arbiter
defaulted it to 1.0 per unit - so the site target was split 50/50 regardless
of what either pack could do. Two things now feed it, and they are different
kinds of thing:
* a `pack` UNIT claim at P_SAFETY that CLOSES a unit's envelope at its own
`bms_soc_floor` or at 100 % - a PERMISSION, obeyed absolutely, so an empty
pack is not asked to discharge and its share goes to the sibling;
* SoC-aware weights by ENERGY headroom in kWh - a PREFERENCE, which
`_fill()`'s last-resort pass will override the moment the sibling saturates.
Measured (test_packshare.py part 8): at a load one pack cannot cover, the
weighted arm and the shipped arm command the IDENTICAL watts into an empty pack
and deliver the IDENTICAL watts. Only the envelope stops the ask, and what it
buys is not delivery - it is a reported `unmet_w` where the record used to read
impeccable. Weights are a comfort choice for STABILITY and NOT for DELIVERY.
Also: an optional per-entry `capacity_kwh` (schema change, all-or-nothing across
the roster, rule 9 refuses a partial one); per-pack arbitrage sizing, with the
sell side's no-op stated rather than hidden; and a 0 W trade refused by name,
because a 0 W arbitrage claim is a park order that outranks the loop.
SAFETY-42 and this card meet at one hazard from opposite sides - OPT-09 stops
the site ASKING a pack whose SoC says it cannot deliver, SAFETY-42 alarms when a
pack that said it could does not - and its end-to-end fixture moved as a result.
Its finding is unchanged and is now stated on the two quantities its rejected
discriminator actually reads.
Not filed at all at a roster of one: at N=1 every source routes to the site, so
the interval would bound the SITE TARGET, and SAFETY-25's decided Option A
stands untouched on the live install.
⚠️ INVERTER B DOES NOT EXIST. Its 4600 W / 20.48 kWh / 10 % are FROM DATASHEET
AND SERIAL, and `sim/plantsim.py`'s INVERTER_B is inverter A copied
(`measured=False`), so every two-inverter figure here is arithmetic or two
copies of A. No hardware was touched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
Claude
|
090a8ecc35 |
SAFETY-42 round 2: pin the two thresholds at a config that is not the shipped one
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 6m7s
THE BLOCKER. At the `delinquent()` call site, `self.tuning.saturation_w` -> `250.0` (-19 B) was a survivor of all 23 suites. It is not an equivalent mutant: two copies of inverter A, B wedged, `saturation_w: 1800` (inside its own schema int(100,2000)) and a load of 1600 W put B's shortfall strictly between the literal and the configured value - head names nobody, the mutant names B. At the shipped 500 both name it, which is exactly why every fixture in part 4 was blind: their gaps are all above both thresholds. It matters beyond a mutation score. `delivery.py`'s MIN_W_IS_SATURATION_W note and the `delivery_hold_s` block in config.yaml both promise an operator, in shipped prose, that there is no fourth copy of a threshold to keep in step and no way for the two to drift - raise `saturation_w` and this check moves with you. A literal at the call site removes exactly that promise, silently, and the promise is why the design was chosen over a `delivery_w` key. ASKING THE SAME QUESTION OF EVERY OTHER NUMBER THIS CHECK READS FOUND A SECOND SURVIVOR OF ALL 23 SUITES: `bms_floor=inv.bms_soc_floor` -> `10.0` (-13 B), invisible because config.yaml's own example states 10 % and every fixture in this file used it. Two arms bracket it: a pack at 15 % against its own 25 % cut-out is cold and must stay unnamed (the literal names an empty pack), and a pack at 8 % against its own 5 % cut-out is wedged and must be named (the literal explains the fault away). One arm on each side leaves no constant at all. `delivery_hold_s` and `is_live()`'s window were ALREADY pinned - the fixtures had to move them to run - and `LINK_STALE_S` has no option behind it, so "pinned across a changed config" is not available for it and is not claimed. DECISIONS section 9 enumerates all of it with the deltas and which check kills which. Verified in the CI image, tree mounted :ro, `python3 -B`, `__pycache__` purged and counted before every run (TEST-15): R5 saturation_w -> 250.0 -19 B killed by part 4b(a) R6 bms_soc_floor -> 10.0 -13 B killed by part 4b(b), both arms R7 arm(self.delivery_cfg) -> DeliveryConfig() -1 B killed (already) R8 is_live(now) -> is_live(now, 3600.0) +8 B killed (already) R9 pack cut-out -> conjoined site floor +105 B killed twice head: 23/23 test files PASS, no bytecode written during the run. No shipped behaviour changes: the only edits to app/ are comments. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
706e625d99 |
SAFETY-42: a unit that stops delivering, and the discriminator the card asked for does not exist
A unit standing at a non-zero share and producing nothing is seen by NOTHING. SAFETY-30's per-unit sign gate needs OPPOSITION on both sides of 250 W and a unit at 0 W is not opposing, it is ABSENT. The site sum still agrees with the meter in direction. Circulating power is exactly zero when one unit does nothing. The only trace left is `reason == "saturated-freeze"`, which clamp.py:93-96 documents as the alarm an operator learns to ignore. It is HW-01's shape, which ran 6 h 25 m with all three layers spectators. ⚠️ THE CARD'S OWN DISCRIMINATOR WAS BUILT FIRST AND FALSIFIED, AND THAT IS THE MAIN CONTENT. SAFETY-42 asks for "saturation persisting past N while |grid error| > X, both derived". Run on the two-master rig it fails in BOTH directions, and no (N, X) fixes either: FALSE POSITIVE `plantsim.Plant.limit()` returns 0 W for a discharge command into a pack at its own floor, and a wedged unit produces 0 W too. Load 2000 W, equal weights, 2000 W per-unit cap, 120 cycles: THE TWO ARMS ARE IDENTICAL ON ALL 120 in grid, site target, every share and every measured watt. Both saturated-freeze on 116 of them, both hold |grid error| over 300 W on all 120 and settle at 1200 W, both read circulating 0.0 W. The predicate's inputs do not differ, so no threshold on them can differ. And "a cold pack at its floor must not alarm" is the card's own AC 2. FALSE NEGATIVE the standing grid error is what a HEALTHY SIBLING ERASES. Load 800 W, same config, B wedged: over the last 30 of 200 cycles the loop is frozen on 30 of 30 while the worst |grid error| is 30 W, with B standing at +770 W and delivering 0 W. Any X above 30 W is silent for the whole run on the exact fault the card describes. WHAT REPLACES IT. Per unit, for a discharge share, `share - measured`; readable because of a reduction that only exists at N>=2: a unit is named while it is short by more than `saturation_w` with NO ACCOUNT for it, and the units in that state are a PROPER SUBSET of the units asked to discharge. THE ACCOUNT keeps the cold pack out and is the only thing that can: the two cases are identical in the power domain, so the discriminator has to be a non-power fact, and there is exactly one - the pack's own SoC against its own `bms_soc_floor`, asked through `peakguard.discharge_permitted()` rather than transcribed. ⚠️ `bms_soc_floor` ALONE, not `pack_floor_pct()`'s conjunction with `peak_soc_floor`: that floor bounds a money-saving discharge only and using it would explain away a wedged unit anywhere between the two. THE PROPER SUBSET keeps a whole-site cause out - a derate this add-on cannot see hits every unit; one box that stopped listening does not - and it is what makes this INERT AT N=1, by algebra rather than by a roster guard. IT REPORTS. IT DOES NOT ACT, and the strongest argument is for acting. Dropping the wedged unit from `live` genuinely recovers a site the shipped path does not: at load 1500 W, kept in the split the site settles at 800 W with a 700 W error and NEVER comes inside 100 W in 150 cycles (the freeze pins the target, so the sibling's SHARE never grows); dropped, it delivers 1500 W from cycle 14. What refuses it is that the only re-allocation this add-on can express is all-or-nothing: a unit derated to 50 % is short by more than saturation_w with nothing to explain it, so this detector names it too, and at load 3000 W dropping it leaves the site delivering 2000 W against 2400 W kept - 400 W WORSE. A partial re-allocation is what would make acting safe and the allocator cannot express it. That is a card. control.py is NOT MODIFIED. The freeze shapes the loop; this reports on it. NUMBERS, MEASURED. The watts side is `Tuning.saturation_w`, read at runtime, so there is no fourth CFG-03 copy and it cannot drift from the number the control law itself calls "not following". `delivery_hold_s: 185` comes off 2640 closed-loop two-inverter runs in which nothing is faulty (6 gains x 5 slews over the whole schema range, across load reversals, a flapping load and ASYMMETRIC SPLITS - a family SAFETY-30's campaign did not have and the one that dominates here) plus 1890 runs at a roster of ONE as the control: threshold reversals flapping weighted N=1 control * 500 W 20.0 s 0.0 s 30.0 s 0.0 s The N=1 column is 0.0 s at EVERY threshold in all 1890 runs, and the flapping column - the family that defeated SAFETY-30's site window - is zero too, because a common stimulus makes both units short at once and the subset stops being proper. ⚠️ The curve is NOT monotone (55.0 s at 250 W against 40.0 s at 100 W): lowering the threshold can turn a proper subset into the whole roster and BREAK the run. ⚠️ THE MARGIN IS MEASURED, NOT FELT, BECAUSE INVERTER B DOES NOT PHYSICALLY EXIST. `plantsim.INVERTER_B` is A COPIED, `measured=False`, so every two-inverter figure above is two copies of A. Sweeping a different second unit: the worst legitimate episode is insensitive to B's RAMP (30.0 s at half A's) and scales with its LAG - 45.0 s at twice A's measured 10 s, 90.0 s at four times it. 185 s is 6.2x the measured worst, 2.06x the four-times-slower case, 6.2x LINK_STALE_S and 4.9x inside the 900 s quarter. Deliberately not 180, which is SAFETY-02's site hold. SAFETY-34. `unit/<name>/delivery_tripped` in the store, one notification id per unit, re-raised on the first cycle of every process, cleared by the Start press. No flat mirror: a rollback lands on a version that drives one actuator, where this check is inert. ⚠️ SCHEMA CHANGE - `delivery_hold_s` joins options: and schema:, so this needs a version bump before it ships. Additive and defaulted, so an existing options blob stays valid. STATED GAPS: charge shares are not graded (no configured charge ceiling exists, so a constant-voltage taper cannot be explained and arming it would fire on every maintenance charge); every unit wedged at once is not caught (the subset is not proper and no instrument here separates that from a plant that cannot). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
6864109a01 |
SAFETY-37: a stale reading is None, and arrival cannot be what says so
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 5m34s
The architect pass made SAFETY-37, TEL-06 and TEL-08 one systemic problem - "a stale reading holds its last value and reads healthy" - and this builds the single policy. Both consumers the card names are gated by one change, and neither consumer needed a line: `SignWatchdog.evaluate` already CLEARS its window on a None measurement and `circulating_w` already returns None for a roster with a missing term. Neither could ever receive one. The gate is the piece that was missing BETWEEN the shipped read and the shipped checks. ⚠️ ONE CRITERION IN THE CARD COULD NOT BE IMPLEMENTED AS WRITTEN, AND SAYING SO IS THE MAIN CONTENT. The card says "only arrival separates them". At this layer arrival cannot: `read_inputs()` polls Home Assistant's state cache about once a second and HA answers 200 with a number whether or not the publisher behind the entity is alive, so both members of the pair arrive identically for ever. test_freshness.py part 1a BUILDS the arrival-age gate the card asks for and grades it failing - the age is 0.0 s at every instant of both runs, a threshold that can never fire, which is TEL-06's own defect one layer up. The half of the rule that survives is honoured absolutely: nothing here reads a Home Assistant timestamp, and the check asserts the module contains no `last_updated`. So the criterion became: a reading is stale when it has not moved through a change it was OBLIGED to follow. STALE <=> unchanged >= 35 s AND |standing| >= 250 W AND |standing - standing when the reading last changed| >= 250 W Latched until a different value arrives. `Inverter.batt` becomes None - never a held number - which is a missing input, which §11.1 rule 1 answers with 0 W. WHY A CONJUNCTION AND NOT A THRESHOLD, MEASURED 2026-09-06. Replaying the committed 30-day capture of this house's own 1 W power entity (485,841 samples out of HA's recorder, where a row exists only on a CHANGE, so the gap between rows IS the unchanged duration every consumer saw): the longest legitimate unchanged run is 263.2 s, held at -899.0 W. A false-positive-free threshold would have to exceed that, and 263 s is 3.5x too slow for a consumer that trips at 75 s. There is no admissible threshold. Every one of those long runs is under an UNMOVING load, which is what the travel term keys on. THE BOUND, derived at both ends and graded against the shipped config.yaml. Floor 17.0 s = 6.0 plant settle (NOTES §5.9, measured 2026-08-22) + 10.0 ESPHome publish (firmware/goodwe-master.yaml:181) + 1.0 read period (run_control's asyncio.sleep(1)). Ceiling 75.0 s = min(circulation_hold_s 75, unit_sign_disagree_s 85). Band [34.0, 37.5]; 35 is a CHOICE inside a DERIVED band and the check says so - the first draft claimed the band held one integer and went red on its own first run. MOVE_W is the LARGEST admissible value, unit_sign_disagree_w, because below it the consumer cannot speak at all. SoC is STATED, NOT WIRED, and BOUNDS carries it with wired=False and the reason. Its obligation term is energy through the pack, not command travel - a rested pack holds a percent for hours under a 0 W command - and K needs a usable capacity nobody has measured. That is TEL-08's; the record says so. ⚠️ BEHAVIOUR CHANGES AT THE SHIPPED ROSTER OF ONE, and it is named rather than hidden: a FROZEN register now stops the site where it used to read as a healthy measurement for ever. That is HW-01, which was a one-inverter site. A healthy install is unchanged, asserted over sixty reads of a dithering register under a reversing command. A false verdict fails toward 0 W behind the existing stale_input_s hold and clears itself on the register's next move. ⚠️ BOTH UNITS IN EVERY TWO-INVERTER FIXTURE ARE INVERTER A with different numbers passed in; inverter B does not physically exist (~2026-09-12). MUTATION: 16 mutations against a purged, :ro, python3 -B tree, fingerprinted before and after every revert. One survivor, and it is the finding - dropping the magnitude term left every check green because no fixture separated "the command travelled 250 W" from "the command ended up above 250 W". Closed, and recorded as MUTATION.md habit 17. A second process defect is habit 18: a mutation run that timed out between the edit and the revert left the module mutated on disk and nothing announced it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
5d7e275df4 |
SAFETY-39: slew_w is a ratio to the rail, and gain is what is still wrong
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 5m16s
`slew_w: 1000` was derived on 2026-08-22 against a clamp of 1500 W, where "capping how far the loop can jump ahead of the inverter" was true because the rail itself bounded the excursion. The live install went to max_w 5000 and the constant did not move, so the loop crosses its whole output range in 10 s against a plant NOTES.md §5.10 measured at ~18 s. Measured on the owner's system 2026-09-05 11:43-11:46: a 3.4 kW export drove the setpoint 380 -> 5000 W in five 2 s ticks, the battery to -5154 W past a 5000 VA rating, and the grid from 3.4 kW of EXPORT to 2.8 kW of IMPORT. Nothing was broken; the rail moved. REPRODUCED FIRST, and one half of it is not reproducible at all. On plantsim.Plant and on an independent in-repo model: the setpoint stepping a full 1000 W per tick to the rail (48 of 51 export steps), and the meter crossing from export into import. The -5154 W figure is NOT reproducible in either model, because both clamp the plant at its rating - so the card's AC "battery no longer exceeds max_w in simulation" is unfalsifiable and was rewritten rather than met. THE DELIVERABLE IS THE RELATIONSHIP. SLEW_RAIL_FRAC = LOOP_TICK_S / PLANT_SETTLE_S = 2 s / 18 s = 1/9 slew_w = 0 now means FOLLOW THE RAIL - SLEW_RAIL_FRAC * max_w - exactly as integrator_max_w = 0 already means follow max_w. It is the shipped default: 222 W at max_w 2000, 556 W at 5000, 1067 W at a ~9600 W two-inverter site. validate.py rule 10 refuses an explicit value faster than that, graded against sum(unit_caps(opts)) - the roster sum, i.e. Controller.site_max_w - so a second inverter moves the bound with no operator action. VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT: restoring slew_w 1000 at max_w 5000 is refused, and the refusal names the rail, the crossing time, the measurement and what to do. Equality, one watt of slack, the live interim 400 and slew_w 0 at every rating all still start. GAIN IS THE CONSTANT THAT IS STILL WRONG, and it is NOT changed here. Over 51 export steps the over-absorption is FLAT in slew (958 W at 1000, 1081 W at 250) and monotone in gain (987 W at 0.6, 876 at 0.3, 435 at 0.2): slew_w bounds the OUTPUT, while the integrator moves gain*error per cycle and reaches a 5000 W rail in under three ticks whatever the slew is. Two control-law constants moving in one release on a running house makes the next measurement uninterpretable. ⚠️ N=2: the site rail becomes sum(max_w) ~ 9600 W (inverter B FROM DATASHEET AND SERIAL, not measured, and sim/plantsim.py's INVERTER_B is A copied), and the enforced ratio produces 1067 W there automatically. But a growing rail LOOSENS this bound, and the >= 900 W symptom goes stale at N=2 the same way the constant did - both stated in the record rather than left to be discovered. Nothing reached the inverter. The live install still runs the interim slew_w 400 applied by hand on 2026-09-05, which rule 10 accepts unchanged. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
26c5ee8adc |
TEL-07: a second MQTT device for inverter B, and A keeps the one it has
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m58s
MQTT discovery announced ONE device and hung every entity off one unique_id prefix, so at two inverters B's per-unit telemetry had nowhere to go. It has somewhere now, and not one entity that already exists moved. ⚠️ THE ASYMMETRY IS DELIBERATE. The first roster entry's per-unit rows are announced on THE DEVICE IT ALREADY HAS; every later entry gets its own device, via_device the controller. "One device per inverter" is tidier and is the change that renames every entity on the live install - and because HA keeps the id it composed at FIRST discovery, a rename produces a NEW entity beside a DEAD one: the history stays behind and every dashboard, template and automation naming it goes on pointing at a sensor that quietly stopped updating, including the three live watchdog automations. The composed ids come out symmetric anyway (sensor.goodwe_inverter_a_battery_power / ..._inverter_b_...), so the tidy design's only real benefit is bought here without its cost. * four per-unit rows - setpoint, battery power, SoC, SAFETY-02 sign latch - announced only from a roster of two. At N=1 nothing is announced and nothing is published: no second device, no renamed entity, no added topic. * grid and p1_sample_age_s stay SITE-scoped and are announced ONCE, at every roster length 1-6. One P1, one grid connection, and p1_sample_age_s is a watchdog input - a second copy is a second answer to "is the meter fresh?". * inverter.roster_names() is the one answer to what the units are called, read by build_roster() and by the publisher, which must know the roster before a Controller exists because announcing happens on the CONNACK. * DECISIONS/TEL-07-second-mqtt-device.md records the two designs side by side. VERIFIED BY DIFFING THE ANNOUNCED PAYLOADS, not by reading the code. The release/1.0 baseline in test_mqtt.py was generated by running that commit's module, not transcribed. Roster of one: 9 topics, 0 missing, 0 changed, 0 added. Roster of two: 0 missing, 0 changed, 8 added. MEASURED, NOT ASSERTED. Sixteen mutations through tools/mutation_run.sh; twelve are in the file as a running table, each named with the property it breaks. Three of those properties exist because the table found their ABSENCE - dropping the unit from the state topic, moving `grid` into the per-unit set, and `units=()` in main()'s publisher call were all GREEN on the first run, as was a roster fallback naming two nameless entries `inverter-a`. Part 9 enumerates what the file still cannot see, with sizes. ⚠️ INVERTER B DOES NOT PHYSICALLY EXIST (~2026-09-12). Every roster of two here is SIMULATED, from the datasheet and serial in NOTES.md §1.1b. Nothing about B has been measured and no entity described here has been seen on a broker. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
f9e7fbf86d |
SAFETY-32: bms_soc_floor per pack, rule 8 per unit
`bms_soc_floor` describes A BATTERY, not a site. At two packs of different models the cut-outs differ, and one number for both graded the shallower pack against the deeper one's BMS - so a site with cut-outs of 10 % and 30 % under `peak_soc_floor: 20` STARTED, and the guard would command a forced discharge that pack B's BMS, not the operator's floor, is the thing that stops. That is rule 8's own failure mode, reached through rule 8. Scoped to the card's third bullet, per its PM PROOFREAD: the aggregate anti-windup (DEV-02) and per-instance `achievable_w` (CFG-04) were verified as already shipped and are untouched. * config.yaml: `bms_soc_floor: int(0,50)` REQUIRED per `inverters:` entry. Nothing is inherited; the flat key stays the single-inverter shape's own cut-out. A per-entry DEFAULT was declined - a default is one number for every pack, which is this card's defect - and the decision is recorded. * inverter.py: `Inverter.bms_soc_floor`; an entry that states none gets None, not a borrowed number and not 0.0 (the most permissive value the key has). * peakguard.py: `Pack`, `pack_floor_pct()`, `pack_permissions()`, `binding_soc_floor()`. `discharge_permitted()` is unchanged and is still the one place the question is answered. * validate.py: `unit_bms_floors_indexed()` carries the ROSTER index; rule 8 grades EVERY unit and NAMES the one it refuses. Graded with the offender SECOND and with the same two numbers in the other order. * main.py: `Controller.packs`; `decide(soc_floor=...)` is the per-pack reduction of the same option; the floor-limited notification names the pack that stopped the site. `pack_floor_soc` - the emptiest pack, and its None-on-missing behaviour - is untouched. * tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py: RE-RUN and repaired. The required key broke §C and left §D printing PASS on a refusal about a different key. §D is now an isolated counterfactual over an accepted merged baseline, one key varied, asserting the key name. `all cases passed` on 2026.08.0. Stated rather than hidden: under any config rule 8 accepts the per-pack FLOOR reduces to `peak_soc_floor` for every pack. The reduction is written for `unit_caps_indexed()`'s reason and graded on both sides - 1775 rule-8-valid pairs answer the option, the pair rule 8 refuses answers the cut-out. `peak_soc_floor` is still one number for the site, so the "deeper pack needlessly withheld" half is filed as an open question, not closed. Full 19-file suite green. Twelve source mutations through tools/mutation_run.sh: eleven red, one argued survivor. The battery also found `_flat_bms_floor()` defaulting in two places, each covering for the other. No measurement of inverter B appears anywhere: it does not exist yet. Every second-pack figure is simulated and labelled. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
65cddf35f1 |
MAINT-05 fix round: grade the migration against the ROSTER, not against the name it was handed
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m47s
REJECTED because a survivor undoes AC 5, and it survived for the recurring
reason: two fixture values that must be distinguishable were EQUAL.
THE SURVIVOR. app/main.py:282 mutated from `self.inverters[0].name` to `UNIT_A`
left the full 19-file suite green. `inverter.UNIT_A == "inverter-a"`, and every
two-pack fixture in test_maintenance.py named its first roster entry
"inverter-a" - so the two expressions were the same string in every check that
existed. main.py's own comment made the distinction load-bearing and nothing in
the repository could see whether that comment was true.
THE FAILURE IS REAL. `build_roster()` names a declared roster's entries from the
config and numbers a nameless one POSITIONALLY (`inverter-1`), so "inverter-a"
is not even the fallback. On ["garage","shed"] with a flat last_completed of
2026-08-07 the mutant migrates into unit/inverter-a/, pack 0 reads back None,
and both packs come up believing they have never been recalibrated.
AND IT FAILED SILENTLY, which was the worse half: `_verify_moves()` read back
the keys it had just WRITTEN, under the namespace it had just been HANDED, was
satisfied, and MAINT_SCHEMA_KEY was stamped - so the next start skipped the
migration too. A postcondition that reads back the namespace it was handed
cannot detect being handed the wrong one.
WHAT CHANGED
1. THE POSTCONDITION IS GRADED AGAINST THE ROSTER. `_verify_moves()` takes the
names the MACHINES read and reports a namespace that is not among them as
`misdirected` - a new, differently-named failure from `lost`:
* `lost` is "the store took the write and dropped it" - a storage fault,
with a harmless-default case (a dropped `last_completed: None` loses
nothing, because absent and never-recalibrated are the same statement);
* `misdirected` is "the store did exactly as it was told, by a caller that
was wrong". There is no harmless-default version of it - a write nobody
reads is not information whatever its value - so it fails `ok` alone.
`ok` gates the marker, so a misdirected migration is NOT stamped and the next
start re-runs it. Asymmetric on purpose: a re-run is recoverable (rule 1
makes it a no-op, rule 2 left the flat keys to recover from), a silent skip
is not. Part 9b MEASURES the recovery rather than asserting it.
2. `migrate_maint_keys()` TAKES THE ROSTER IN PLACE OF AN `n_units` COUNT. The
count was `len(self.inverters)` at the only call site, so the roster carries
it, and a count beside the names is a second opinion about how many packs
there are.
3. THE FIXTURES CAN NOW REACH THE FAILURE THEY NAME. Parts 9 and 11 run on
["garage","shed"], each behind a PRECONDITION check that the first name is
not UNIT_A - so an edit that makes them equal again goes red instead of
making the claims vacuous. Part 11's fixture date is relative to `now`, not
a literal, so "history preserved" and "history lost" cannot converge as the
file ages past `interval_days`.
MUTATION LEDGER - all red, purged tree, none at +0 B, full detail on the PR:
M1 main.py inverters[0].name -> UNIT_A -16 B 4 checks red
M2 store.py drop `roster=names` from _verify_moves -14 B 5 checks red
M3 store.py drop the misdirected.append -37 B 5 checks red
M4 store.py ok: drop `and not self.misdirected` -25 B 3 checks red
M5 fixture garage -> inverter-a (the trap itself) +4 B 5 checks red
M6 store.py parts[1] -> parts[-1] +1 B 1 check red
FOUND AND NOT FIXED - `migrate_unit_keys()` HAS THE SAME HOLE AND IT IS A LATCH.
It runs BEFORE `build_roster()` (each Inverter restores its latch in its
constructor), so it is handed the constant UNIT_A with no roster to grade
against. On a declared roster a pre-DEV-02 `sign_tripped: true` lands under
unit/inverter-a/sign_tripped, which no unit reads - and
`_grade_store_migration()`, whose whole job is to re-arm exactly this, is
DEFEATED BY THE KEY THE DEFECT WROTE: its "is anything namespaced latched" test
is satisfied by the misdirected value itself. Measured, with the flat-config
counterfactual, and pinned as a running check (test_maintenance.py part 13)
whose assertions state the WRONG behaviour on purpose. It wants its own card:
the remedy is in inverter.py and SAFETY-02's semantics, and a silent expansion
into a safety latch is how a rejected PR becomes a broken one.
Suite: 19/19 PASS, purged tree, bind-mounted :ro in goodwe-addon-ci.
No hardware was touched; every fixture here is SIMULATED and pack B's 3000 W
remains a marked hypothesis.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
1aef19e995 |
MAINT-05: one recalibration per pack, and only one pack moves power at a time
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m48s
§12's monthly cycle drains a pack to empty and refills it to true its coulomb
counter. There was exactly one `Maintenance` and one un-namespaced history, so
at two packs only the first was ever recalibrated - and nothing prevented the
cycle draining pack A while the loop charged pack B, which is two power-moving
phases on one grid connection pulling against each other.
* ONE `Maintenance` PER ROSTER ENTRY, each with its own schedule, phase and
history under `unit/<name>/...`. `store.migrate_maint_keys()` moves an
install's flat history into the first pack's namespace under
`migrate_unit_keys()`'s three rules - shared in code via `_move_flat_keys()`
and `_verify_moves()`, not restated - on its own marker, because unlike
DEV-02's it runs only where the roster has more than one pack. The flat keys
are kept LIVE as the rollback view.
* ONE MAINTENANCE SLOT PER SITE (`maintenance.arbitrate()`). At most one pack
in a power-moving phase - drain, charge AND hold. The holder is DERIVED from
the packs' own stored phases, never persisted, so a restart mid-drain
re-derives it. Several packs due in the same hour: the slot goes to the one
that has gone longest without a completed cycle; roster order breaks a
numeric tie and nothing else. Nothing preempts a cycle in flight.
* THE DEFERRED PACK IS NOT STARVED AND IS NOT A FAULT. A deferral does not
stamp `last_start_attempt` and does not move the phase, so neither the 12 h
drain nor the 36 h charge timeout is reachable by waiting.
* The claim is filed on the pack whose state machine produced it, and stays
SCOPE_UNIT - ARCH-01's rule.
* `validate.py` rule 6 grades `maintenance_charge_w` against the WEAKEST cap on
the roster now, as its own comment said it must once `maint_unit` stopped
being `inverters[0]`.
* At a roster of one nothing changes, and it is asserted: no new store key, the
migration does not run, the four cycle events are the shipped strings, the
banner is the bare phase.
* RECORDED NOT FIXED: a drain pins its pack while the loop's target is a site
claim, so below the pin the allocator refuses the split and the site parks at
0 W. Pre-existing at
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
ae21b71824 |
Merge release/1.0 into SAFETY-30
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m39s
CFG-04 (#45) merged first and moved the base. Two conflicts, both resolved as the union of the two sides: - app/main.py: an import-block collision. CFG-04 added validate_unit_ranges to the .validate import; SAFETY-30 added AGAINST_METER, AGAINST_OWN_POWER, SIGN_OPTION_DEFAULTS and SignWatchdog to the .watchdog import. Neither side dropped anything, so the resolution keeps both lists whole. - CHANGELOG.md: two adjacent new entries under ## Unreleased. Both kept. Both sides also independently rewrote large parts of test_peakguard.py (60 and 47 insertions against the merge base) and git merged them textually, so the full suite was run on the MERGE RESULT rather than inferred from the two parents: 19 passed, 0 failed, twice. One caveat recorded rather than hidden: test_peakguard.py failed once during the first sequential full-suite run and then passed 10/10 in isolation and in two further full runs on this same tree. It passes on both parents too, so this is the pre-existing flakiness CFG-04 already disclosed, not a merge defect - it is timing- or load-sensitive. It sits on the required CI context and can therefore block an unrelated merge at random, which wants a card of its own. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
f000547518 |
SAFETY-30: grade each inverter against its own power, and the site's total against the meter
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m38s
THE DEFECT, in one line. `inv.sign_wd.evaluate(stood, self.grid, ...)` compared
the command THIS controller put on ONE actuator against what the WHOLE SITE is
exchanging with the network. At a roster of one those are two views of the same
thing - specs.md §6.2's identity - and that is what makes the check sound and
what earned it the best record in the safety table (NOTES.md: 93 % agreement
while healthy against 4 % during runaway, four observed episodes, zero false
positives). At two inverters they are not, and it fails in BOTH directions:
FALSE TRIP inverter A commanded -1500 W while the meter reads +1500 W is
evidence of nothing when inverter B is discharging 3000 W exactly
as told. Nothing is faulty and the highest-value check fires.
MISSED the converse, and it is worse. A unit commanded +1500 W and
MEASURED at -1500 W, beside a sibling at +1500 W, leaves P1
exactly where a healthy site leaves it. The summation destroys the
evidence and no threshold recovers it.
DEV-02 had already shipped the per-INSTANCE half - one SignWatchdog per
inverter, namespaced latch, a trip on B no longer latching A. What was left was
the COMPARISON, and it is two questions rather than one:
PER UNIT this unit's standing command against ITS OWN measured power
(`Inverter.batt`, holding register 0x0518, per-instance since
DEV-02). Conclusion: "the actuator I am driving is not doing what I
told it" - a fact about one device, so the remedy stays the per-unit
`failsafe` SET that arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE has classified SCOPE_UNIT
from the day it was written. That entry read "the evidence is
site-wide and the remedy is not"; the first half is now simply true.
SITE the SUM of the standing commands against the meter, as a new
`sign_site` SET at P_SAFETY on the site actuator, latched under flat
`site_sign_tripped` / `site_sign_reason`. This is the 2026-08-20
fault day and NO per-unit check can see it, because every inverter
may be faithfully executing its share of a number that is itself
wrong. It stops every inverter and the banner names the site.
WHAT IT IS NOT, said here because two guards that overlap without saying so is
how a false-alarm generator gets built. It is not SAFETY-31: circulation.py
compares the units AGAINST EACH OTHER and catches them pushing power THROUGH
each other, which nets to zero at the meter and about which no single command is
evidence. This compares each unit against ITS OWN COMMAND. They overlap in
exactly one scenario - a unit reversing while its sibling pulls the other way -
and test_watchdog.py asserts on that fixture that both fire and what each
concludes. It is also not the saturation freeze, which is a MAGNITUDE test
(|command - measured| > 500 W) that shapes the loop and fires on a merely
saturated unit; this is a DIRECTION test that latches and parks one.
THE FOUR NUMBERS, RE-DERIVED AT TWO INVERTERS - one carried with a justification
and one refused. 1890 closed-loop runs on admin/goodwe's TEST-19 two-master rig
in which NOTHING is faulty, swept over the whole range config.yaml accepts for
`gain` and `slew_w`, across load reversals with write staggers and flapping
loads, and RUN AT BOTH ROSTERS so the N=1 arm is the control:
unit_sign_disagree_w 250 `saturation_w / 2`. The check gates on both sides,
opposed, so the smallest gap it can see is 500 W -
exactly where compute()'s own anti-windup test
already says the inverter is not following. It
cannot fire on a divergence the control law calls
ordinary tracking. Worst legitimate opposition at
250 W: 10.0 s; the curve is nearly flat, because a
unit's own power chases its own command.
unit_sign_disagree_s 85 8.5x that 10.0 s, 2.8x the firmware's own 30 s
link veto (inverter.LINK_STALE_S), under half the
180 s site hold.
site_sign_disagree_w 300 CARRIED. Its argument is the meter's noise floor
and the 15 W deadband; the roster touches neither,
and the campaign agrees - the gate opens in 994 of
1050 runs at two inverters and 955 of 1050 at one.
site_sign_disagree_s 325 NOT CARRIED, and this is the number the card
exists to not assume. The worst legitimate
crossing at 300 W is 110 s with one inverter and
215 s with TWO, because the command must travel a
rail that is the roster sum at a `slew_w` that is
not - reachable at gain 0.05, slew_w 50 and a
2.2 kW load reversal, all schema-legal. 180 s
would have shipped a false trip. 325 s is 1.51x
the measured worst, inside the 900 s billing
quarter and inside every episode of the fault day.
AT ONE INVERTER NOTHING CHANGES, and "nothing" is asserted rather than assumed.
The two questions are the same sentence there, so only the detector that shipped
is armed: same comparison against the meter, same 300 W / 180 s, same reason
string byte for byte, same namespaced latch and flat rollback mirror, same
`failsafe` claim, same banner, same single status row - and the site detector is
NEVER CALLED, counted on the object over twelve cycles.
VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT. Thirteen mutations on fresh per-mutation trees with no
__pycache__, mounted :ro, with the battery refusing to report at all unless the
baseline is green. Twelve red on the first pass. M4 - the site half armed at N=1
as well - SURVIVED, because the check read `disagree_since is None` and the unit
detector trips first, parks the inverter and leaves the site standing at 0 W:
the assertion ran, the sentence was true, and the data could not reach the
failure it named. Replaced with a call counter on the object; M4 is red now.
Recorded as a survivor in DECISIONS/SAFETY-30-per-unit-sign.md §5, with the
first battery's own RED BASELINE - a shared mutation directory read mid-copy -
discarded rather than reported.
RECORDED, NOT FIXED: the site comparison is defeated by a square-wave load whose
half period is about one control cycle, which holds it opposed for ~1000 s. The
N=1 control arm is what makes that interpretable - it is identical at the roster
this add-on ships, so it is a property of comparing a lagged command against a
meter and has nothing to do with the second inverter. It wants an alternation
test rather than a number, and a card of its own.
SAFETY-24's lo-only asymmetry proof re-run unchanged: 1296 combinations, 0
negative floors, `hi` +inf on every claim, every claim on the SITE actuator.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
6b85acb0f1 |
CFG-04: an operator can declare a second inverter, and the shape was measured
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m30s
DEV-02 made every per-device value per-instance - rating, SoC, watchdogs, heartbeat, store keys - so the code stopped assuming one inverter. The options schema did not. `build_roster()` returned a list of exactly one and said so in its own docstring, and there was no `inverters:` key for an operator to write, so the roster could only ever be a roster of one. THE SHAPE, AND WHY IT WAS MEASURED RATHER THAN CHOSEN config.yaml had no list-of-objects anywhere, and `static_profile` carries a whole tariff structure as a JSON string in a `str?` precisely because a nested schema was doubted. That is a question about somebody else's software, so it was answered by running it: `tools/supervisor_shape_probe.py` (committed) runs Supervisor 2026.08.0's OWN `AppOptions` validator and `SCHEMA_APP_CONFIG`, out of the release image, against this repository's config.yaml. 2026.08.0 is the version the live install reports. The full transcript and the argument are in DECISIONS/CFG-04-inverter-roster.md. It accepts the list, enforces per-entry types, refuses a missing `name` / `setpoint_entity` / `max_w` BY NAME, renders the option in the UI as a repeatable section, and drops the key with a warning under an older schema - so a downgrade is not the forward trap in reverse. ⚠️ AND THE `inverters: []` DEFAULT IS LOAD-BEARING, WHICH IS THE MEASUREMENT THAT MATTERED MOST. Supervisor answers `Missing option 'inverters' in root` for an options blob that has no such key - which every existing install's has, since the key did not exist when they were written. `App.options` is the shipped `options:` block deep-merged with the operator's stored one, so the empty default is the difference between an upgrade nobody notices and an add-on that cannot start with a schema pinned to the version that would fix it. That is docs/deploy-rollback.md §4's trap in the FORWARD direction, found before it was sprung. The merger was checked too: lists override rather than concatenate, so a non-empty default could not have grown a roster behind the operator's back. NOTHING IS INHERITED, WHICH IS DEV-02 RESTATED AS A CONFIG RULE `name`, `setpoint_entity` and `max_w` are required of every entry. An entry that omits `soc_entity` has no SoC sensor; it does not borrow the flat one. A three-line fallback would have rebuilt the sibling-grading defect DEV-02 spent a card removing, in YAML. Defaults still live in exactly one place (CFG-03): there is no per-entry default anywhere, because there is no optional per-entry number. A flat `setpoint_entity` left set beside a declared roster is refused rather than ignored - it names an actuator nothing will write. TWO PERMISSIVE READERS IN SHIPPED CODE, AND THREE MORE IN THE CHECKS validate.py rules 5 and 6 compared their thresholds against the FLAT `max_w`. At a roster of two 2000 W units with `max_w: 5000` left over from a single-inverter install, `sign_disagree_w: 3000` passed rule 5 while SAFETY-02's watchdog could fire on NEITHER unit - rule 5's own failure mode, reached through rule 5. They read `unit_caps()` now, which at one inverter is `[max_w]` exactly. main.py's `run_control()` re-ran the device-rating check behind `if self.o.get("setpoint_entity")` - the flat key, which a roster leaves blank - so on a two-inverter site no inverter's `max_w` was graded against the device it is written to, and the skip was silent. `validate_unit_ranges()` grades each unit against its own ESPHome and runs unconditionally. test_peakguard.py's `read_option()` and `_schema_bound()` and test_inverter.py's `read_schema_max()` matched a STRIPPED line and took the first hit, so the nested per-inverter `max_w:` began outranking the flat one - silently, and correctly, because the two bounds are the same int(100,5000) today. A reader that is right by coincidence is this project's named failure mode. All three are anchored at exactly two spaces now; the file's two halves disambiguate `peak_cap_w` instead of first-match, and an ambiguous key raises rather than picking one. test_tariff.py's copy of the idiom went with them. THE AUDIT IS A CHECK, NOT A PROMISE test_inverter.py part 11 finds every config.yaml-reading function in the suite - transitively, because two of the readers CFG-04 had to change never name the file - EXECUTES each against a synthetic two-inverter config.yaml whose per-inverter numbers differ from its flat ones, and fails if any answers with the per-inverter value. The table is not maintained by hand: the signature decides, so the eleventh reader is named on its first run. config.yaml declares `inverters:` BEFORE `max_w:` on purpose and part 11 asserts that ordering, so the trap stays baited. SAFETY-28's `actuator_writers()` needed no change - it was already a structural, case-folding census - but until now there was no configuration in which two writers on one actuator could be WRITTEN DOWN. There is now, and it is refused. VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT Ten mutations run through tools/mutation_run.sh and observed red, listed in test_inverter.py part 12 with the check that bites each. Two survived the first run and the CHECKS were changed, not the table: the inheritance check had blank flat keys, so "inherited" and "not inherited" were the same empty string; and the `run_control()` check asserted a SOURCE LINE was present, which re-indenting it does not remove. Both are recorded in MUTATION.md's "the check's data cannot reach the failure it names" section, which now carries two more habits: assert on behaviour rather than on source text, and give a check whose failure mode is a hang a deadline. 19/19 green in the goodwe-addon-ci image. The one-inverter path is byte- identical: the whole existing suite runs unmodified against it. Version bumped to 0.6.0 - the Supervisor keys the built image by `version:`, so a schema change without a bump is a schema nobody reads. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
7ef3d23245 |
SAFETY-31: measure circulating power, which nets to zero at the meter
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m28s
Inverter A charging at 3 kW while inverter B discharges at 3 kW nets ~0 W at
P1. The site reads idle while both packs are cycled through two round-trip
conversion losses continuously, for no benefit, and the wear is real.
NOTHING EXISTING CAN SEE IT, AND THAT IS STRUCTURAL. Every guard in this
add-on is a consumer of the NET figure at the grid connection: SAFETY-02's
sign watchdog gates on abs(grid_w) > 300 and the gate never opens at a netted
zero; the peak guard and the capacity tariff both bill grid exchange.
Circulating power is precisely the component of per-inverter power that the
sum destroys, so no threshold on any existing detector could reach it.
WHAT ALLOC-01 ALREADY COVERED, AND IS NOT RE-IMPLEMENTED HERE. Its AC 7
shipped the sign-coherence gate (allocator.REFUSE_SIGN, graded by
test_alloc.py part 6): an allocation whose shares carry two signs is REFUSED,
both units named, no shares returned. That is the COMMAND half - the allocator
can no longer command circulating power. This commit is the MEASUREMENT half:
circulation the allocator NEVER COMMANDED.
app/circulation.py the sensor and the trip
main.py site_circulating_w, the evaluation, the claim, the alarm
arbiter.py `circulation` classified SCOPE_SITE, with the argument
store.py a flat, site-level durable latch
mqtt.py sensor.goodwe_circulating_power
config.yaml two options, two schema ranges, CFG-03 discipline
THE SENSOR: sum(|Bi|) - |sum(Bi)|. Zero when the units pull the same way,
2*min(|Ba|,|Bb|) when they oppose. DERIVED FROM MEASURED PER-INVERTER POWER -
Inverter.batt, register 0x0518 - and never from the allocation record. The
cheap version would be simpler and worth nothing: ALLOC-01's gate already
guarantees the record is sign-coherent, so a record-derived sensor reads zero
BY CONSTRUCTION and can only confirm that the allocator agrees with itself,
which is the third failure mode MUTATION.md names. What this catches is a unit
ignoring or lagging its share, a stale share still being executed, a
maintenance or SAFETY-25 pin holding one unit while the loop drives the other,
or HW-01's power stage running its last instruction for 6 h 25 m with the
comms dead and the allocation record impeccable throughout. batt became
per-instance in DEV-02; before that this could not have been written.
VERIFIED BY MAKING ONE UNIT IGNORE ITS SHARE, on the TEST-19 two-master rig:
S = -2500 W shares a = -1250 W b = -1250 W <- record ok, ONE sign, sums
MEASURED A = -1250 W B = +1000 W <- hardware
sensor over the RECORD : 0 W
sensor over MEASURED power : 2000 W -> trips at 190 s
and the card's own scenario, A -3000 W against B +3000 W at zero house load:
the meter reads +0 W, the sensor reads 6000 W, and the shipped SignWatchdog's
predicate is FALSE on 30 of 30 cycles.
WHAT "ACTED ON" MEANS - decided, and recorded in DECISIONS/. The trip files
Claim.set("circulation", P_SAFETY, 0.0) on the SITE actuator: every inverter
to 0 W, latched. HW-01 established that commanding a wedged inverter achieves
nothing, so the remedy is not aimed at it. A circulating loop needs TWO
participants and one of them is THIS CONTROLLER, faithfully driving the
listening sibling into the one that stopped listening. Stopping (1) halves the
loop, which needs no cooperation from the wedged unit, and (2) - the more
important half - makes the residue VISIBLE at the meter instead of cancelled
at it, where every ordinary guard can finally see it. What it cannot do is
stop the wedged unit; the notification says so and names the isolator as the
last actuator. SITE-scoped because the quantity is defined over the roster and
is identically zero for any one unit - there is no fact of the matter about
which of two opposing inverters is the offender, so filing it per-unit would
invent an attribution and could park the only unit still listening.
THE WINDOW IS FROM THE RIG, NOT A ROUND NUMBER (AC 3). 924 closed-loop runs in
which NOTHING is faulty, over both families of legitimate opposition (7
reversals x 5 write staggers; 7 flap periods x 4 amplitudes), swept across the
whole range the schema accepts for gain and slew_w. Worst CONTINUOUS
legitimate opposition by threshold: 505.0 s at 100 W, 40.0 s at 250 W, 10.0 s
at 300 W, 5.0 s at 400 W and above. The knee is 400 W and it is the schema
floor - below it, ordinary operation holds the sensor over the line for
minutes and no window inside the 900 s billing quarter could tell that from a
fault. circulation_w 700 is 1.75x the knee, the headroom bought for inverter
B's ramp and lag being PLACEHOLDERS until SPIKE-04 measures them.
circulation_hold_s 75 clears three bounds: 15x the worst legitimate episode,
2.5x the firmware's own LINK_STALE_S veto, 12x inside the quarter. A momentary
opposition while one unit slews through zero is LEGITIMATE - writes are
serialised, so B's number lands up to a cycle after A's - and 0 of the 924
runs trip.
THE ALARM SURVIVES AN HA RESTART (SAFETY-34). persistent_notification is in
memory, which is exactly how the 2026-09-02 outage went unseen for 6 h 25 m
with the detector correct throughout. The latch is persisted to /data as flat
site-level keys and the notification is RE-RAISED on the first cycle after
every start, through the same code path as a fresh trip - two paths would be
two chances for the restart one to rot unnoticed.
AT N=1 NOTHING CHANGES (AC 5). |B| - |B| is 0 for every reading including one
nobody took, no claim is ever filed, the arbitration is byte-identical, and
the status page says n/a rather than claiming to watch something that cannot
happen.
VERIFIED BY BREAKING IT (AC 4). 18 mutations, all RED on named checks, each on
a freshly copied tree with no __pycache__ mounted :ro. M10 - the sensor
rewritten to read self.allocation.shares - is the headline: it takes AC 2 red.
Three mutations are +0 B, the risky delta, and are marked as such. One
equivalent mutant (the max(0.0,...) guard) is ARGUED rather than claimed:
searched over 700 000 rosters without a negative. One genuine SURVIVOR was
found and closed - publish() turning an unknown into a published 0 W, the
sensor's own None rule defeated one layer out. Full ledger in DECISIONS/.
arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE gains its ninth source, so test_peakguard.py's 10f and 10g
tripwires and test_arbiter.py's scope table went red on the line the append
was written. Updated deliberately, with the argument, as their own comments
require. Full 19-file suite green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
753f700539 |
DEV-02: merge release/1.0, and close the two review blockers
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m15s
PR #43 was rejected on two findings and had gone unmergeable behind SAFETY-28 and the ALLOC-01 fix. This is the merge commit; the conflict resolution and both fixes are below, because a merge that also changes behaviour has to say so. THE MERGE, AND WHAT IT COST =========================== Two conflicts in main.py, both where SAFETY-28 and this card touched the same method: * `write_setpoint()` split into a site entry point plus a per-unit `_write_unit()` here, while SAFETY-28 put its record gate in the old single-unit body. `write_refusal()` now takes the INVERTER it is about. Asking it with `self.unit` - as release/1.0 does - would authorise A's share on B's wire, and would also trip test_inverter.py part 1's AST scan, which goes red on any read of a Controller N=1 view inside Controller. * the SAFETY-28 gate sits above the clamp and below the non-finite coercion, exactly where release/1.0 put it, and is now asked about `inv`. Fallout the merge produced in the checks, re-aimed rather than relaxed: * every fixture that calls `write_setpoint()` DIRECTLY - the clamp probe, the hung-heartbeat experiment and its serialised counterfactual, the split deadline probe - now arms a real allocation record first. test_inverter.py grows an `arm()` built through the shipped `resolve()`, the same shape test_clamp.py's is: the per-unit envelopes are filed as real `supervised` claims and the site target is their sum, so the water-fill has exactly one answer and the fixture cannot quietly become its own allocator. * test_clamp.py's two-unit failsafe fixture assigned `c.units`, which DEV-02 made a derived property with no setter. It appends a real `Inverter`. BLOCKER 1 - AC 4's ARBITER-BOUND EVIDENCE WAS VACUOUS ===================================================== test_peakguard.py claimed "each unit's `supervised` bound is ITS OWN `max_w` - give inverter B a different rating and the claim filed on inverter B moves with it", and compared B's bound against `_b2.max_w`. `second_inverter()` DEFAULTED B's rating to `LIVE_MAX_W`, which is A's. IT COMPARED (-5000, 5000) AGAINST (-5000, 5000): a number against itself, unable to observe the failure it named. Reproduced: filing the per-unit `device`/`supervised` claims from `self.inverters[0]`'s numbers while leaving `actuator=self.actuator_of(..., inv)` alone left ALL 19 FILES GREEN. At a roster of two with A=5000/B=3000 that makes inverter B's planned envelope (-5000, 5000) instead of (-3000, 3000) - a 2000 W over-command the arbiter believes is supervised. It is a DIFFERENT defect from the actuator variant the static routing pin catches, and only the actuator variant was in the mutation table. * `second_inverter()` gives B 3000 W - a hypothesis, marked as one - for every fixture in the file, so no check there can compare B against A by accident. * the claim is asserted against LITERAL numbers rather than against an expression that can read the same object twice, for `supervised` AND for `device` (whose `dev` had the same defect), plus the envelope the ARBITER RESOLVED for B - a claim filed right and resolved wrong is the same defect one layer down. * a PRECONDITION check fails if the two ratings are ever made equal again. * the BOUND mutation is in the table, beside the actuator one, and was observed RED (3 checks in test_peakguard.py) via tools/mutation_run.sh. ⚠️ THIRD INSTANCE THIS SESSION of a check whose DATA cannot reach the failure it names - ARB-03's call-site scan saw 3 of 8 appends, ALLOC-01's replay generator saw 0 escapes where a widened one saw 39,991. MUTATION.md gains a section for it beside the stale-bytecode and masking ones, and the rule is written at the line: ANY CHECK ASSERTING "X DIFFERS FROM Y" MUST BE RUN ONCE WITH X AND Y ACTUALLY MADE DIFFERENT. BLOCKER 2 - THE LATCH WAS SILENTLY DISARMED BY THE ROLLBACK ROUND TRIP ====================================================================== store.py's rule 2 keeps the flat keys "so a rollback still finds its latch". The operator path that rule contemplates is a ROUND TRIP, and this card lost the latch on it: 1. install migrates -> schema_version=1, unit/inverter-a/... = False 2. operator DOWNGRADES; SAFETY-02 trips inside the downgrade window and the old add-on writes only the flat `sign_tripped: true` 3. operator upgrades again -> `rep.ran` is False, so `_grade_store_migration()` returned early, and `Inverter.__init__` read the namespaced key: False Observed: the controller came up with `sign_wd.tripped = False` while /data/state.json said `sign_tripped: true`. That is store.py's own header sentence - "the file still says sign_tripped: true, the banner is green, and the controller resumes driving the wrong way" - rebuilt by the version marker. A firmware version change with a rollback path was performed on this site on 2026-09-02, so this is not hypothetical. Three changes, each graded by a mutation observed RED: * THE OPERATOR'S CLEAR CLEARS BOTH SPELLINGS. That is what removes the "re-arm forever" objection the `rep.ran` gate existed to answer: with the fossil cleared, `flat True + namespaced False` is unambiguously a downgrade-window latch. * A TRIP MIRRORS THE FLAT PAIR. Rule 2 only ever covered the latch present AT MIGRATION TIME - nothing flat was written for a trip taken afterwards, so an operator who downgraded found `sign_tripped: false` and came up DRIVING. store.py claimed the staleness could only fail toward a SPURIOUS latch. It could not; that sentence is corrected rather than left standing. * THE GUARD RUNS ON EVERY START, and asks the STORE - not the roster - whether anything namespaced is latched. A mirrored trip on B must not re-arm a healthy A, and the store is the right place to ask because it holds every `unit/*/sign_tripped` this install has written, including one belonging to a unit that is not in today's roster. Graded by the three-step scenario itself, run end to end in test_inverter.py part 2, with all three preconditions asserted - including that the catching start did NOT migrate anything, which is what used to skip the guard. Part 2's idempotence check now PRESSES the button instead of hand-writing the store, because the state it used to construct is not one the shipped clear path can produce. Part 3 grades the mirror and the clear on a real roster of two. test_watchdog.py's "the flat key is NOT written" assertion is re-aimed rather than deleted: its argument was right about the READ and wrong about the WRITE. Nothing at runtime reads that key, and the one thing that does ignores it whenever any namespaced latch is set - which a sibling's trip always leaves. What its absence actually cost was the rollback. HANDOVER.md and DOCS.md said the flat key "is never read again", which was the instruction an operator clearing a trip by hand would follow. Both corrected: it is a maintained rollback view, it IS read on every start, and clearing a trip by hand means clearing both spellings. MUTATIONS THIS ROUND, each applied on a purged tree via tools/mutation_run.sh and observed RED: * per-unit `device`/`supervised` BOUNDS from `self.inverters[0]`, actuator left correct -> test_peakguard.py 10g * `_grade_store_migration()` gated on `rep.ran` -> test_inverter.py part 2 * the operator's clear leaving the flat keys set -> test_inverter.py part 2/3 * a trip not mirroring the flat pair -> test_inverter.py part 3 * the guard asking only `self.inverters[0]` -> test_inverter.py part 3 19/19 files green on the merged tree. No hardware was touched. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e941bf7f62 |
DEV-02: zero every unit's target when the operator stops, not just the site's
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m12s
A hazard THIS CARD CREATED, found by re-reading the operator paths rather than by a failing check - so a check now exists for it. Before DEV-02 the heartbeat re-emitted `self.target`, so the stop button zeroing that one scalar was enough: the next refresh carried the zero. The heartbeat now re-emits `inv.target` - it has to, or it would put the SITE number on every inverter, which is the ARCH-01 broadcast fault arriving once every `heartbeat_s` on a path with no allocator in it. So a stop that zeroed only `self.target` left each unit's LAST SHARE standing. No cycle has run yet at that moment, so nothing else would have cleared it, and the very next heartbeat - up to `heartbeat_s` later - would put it back on the wire. The operator presses stop, watches the inverter go to zero, and sees it resume seconds later. `command_site_zero()` moves both together and carries the reason. It is one method rather than two lines at three call sites precisely because the two lines have to stay together: shutdown(), the stop button and maint_abort all mean the same thing, and 0 W is the one value that may legitimately be written site-wide. test_inverter.py part 6 presses stop with 995/995 standing and then runs the SHIPPED `send_heartbeats()` before any cycle, which is the racing refresh. The mutation that zeroes the site target alone takes it red. 19 files green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e306c74cb8 |
DEV-02: per-instance inverter objects, so nothing is graded against a sibling
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m15s
Every piece of per-device state in the Controller was a scalar, and several of
them are safety inputs. app/inverter.py introduces an `Inverter` that owns its
entities, its rating, its device range, its SignWatchdog, its last_write and
its last_beat, under store keys namespaced by unit name. The Controller holds a
list of them and keeps only what is genuinely site-level: the P1 reading, the
site integrator, and the tariff quarter.
WHAT THE SCALARS WERE SILENTLY ASSERTING
dev_min/dev_max one pair, read from one setpoint_entity. A second
inverter's rating was NEVER READ AT ALL, so its clamp, its
freeze rail and the peak guard's achievable_w were the
first one's numbers.
soc one reading into the maintenance FSM, SAFETY-24's pack
floor and arbitrage's bounds. An average lets the emptier
pack be driven below its own floor.
sign_wd ONE SignWatchdog, whose own docstring says "one instance
per actuator", latched under FLAT store keys - so a trip
caused by B latched A across restarts and one operator
press cleared both.
last_beat one deadline and one serialised hass.call(), so a hung
write to A ate B's 30 s layer-1 budget.
actual_w BECAME SITE LEVEL WHILE THE READINGS BECAME PER-INSTANCE, and those
are opposite directions on purpose. compute()'s anti-windup test is
`abs(prev_w - actual_w) > saturation_w` with prev_w the SITE target, so feeding
it one inverter's power compares a site number against a unit number, trips the
saturation freeze permanently and leaves a standing grid error. Measured on
admin/goodwe's two-master rig (tools/alloc_sim.py --splits, 2 kW load, 40
cycles), worst |delta| between splits at the meter:
gain one unit's power the site sum
0.2 510 W 0 W
0.4 250 W 0 W
0.6 50 W 0 W
That was ALLOC-01's disclosed finding; test_alloc.py part 8 kept its stimulus
and now grades the other row.
THE STORE MIGRATION IS GRADED, NOT MERELY PERFORMED. sign_tripped/sign_reason
move to unit/<name>/... once, verified by READING BACK what was written, and
the version marker is set only when nothing that carried state was lost. The
flat keys stay in the file so a rollback still finds its latch. And __init__
compares the pre-migration flat latch against what unit A actually came up
with: if the latch did not survive it is RE-ARMED from the legacy value and
shouted about. A latch that silently fails to migrate is a disarmed safety
guard on an install whose state file says it is protected - which is strictly
worse than never persisting it, because now there is evidence saying it is
fine. test_inverter.py part 2 breaks the migration and watches the guard fire.
HEARTBEATS ARE INDEPENDENT AND THE BUDGET IS DERIVED. Each inverter owns its
deadline, the refreshes go out concurrently, and each write is bounded by
WRITE_BUDGET_S = 4 s. The inequality is graded rather than asserted: 4 +
heartbeat_s's schema maximum of 25 < 30, validate.FIRMWARE_INGEST_VETO_S.
Verified by injecting a transport that accepts and never answers.
live_units() ANSWERS HONESTLY. A unit whose every write has been rejected for a
whole layer-1 window is not commandable; the allocator drops it, the survivors
carry its share, the action log names it, and the dropped unit is commanded
0 W rather than left standing on its last share. A roster entry with NO
setpoint_entity is deliberately not handled there - that is a configuration
that cannot be delivered, and it reaches main.py's refusal branch, which is how
that branch keeps a live trigger after this card removed its old one.
AT N=1 NOTHING MOVES. The removed scalars survive as read/write properties of
the sole inverter, so every existing replay runs unmodified - and they REFUSE
at N>=2 rather than answering for the first inverter, which is the tripwire on
a consumer that was never made per-instance.
EVIDENCE. 19 files green. test_inverter.py is new (82 checks). Eighteen
mutations were applied to the shipped modules on a purged tree via
tools/mutation_run.sh and each was observed RED. Two of them SURVIVED first
time and the checks were changed rather than the table: the serialised dispatch
and the shared last_beat both passed while part 6 gathered its own writes and
computed its own `due` list. send_heartbeats() was extracted from run_control()
so the shipped dispatch is reachable by a check at all.
INVERTER B STILL DOES NOT EXIST. build_roster() returns exactly one inverter
from the flat options and is the one function CFG-04 changes; every two-unit
figure here is architecture, and the second rating in the checks is marked a
hypothesis.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
Claude
|
591c35ed01 |
SAFETY-28: gate the write path on the allocation record, not on key count
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m19s
specs §1.5 makes "any configuration in which two writers can reach one
actuator" a non-goal. That non-goal was enforced by counting config keys:
validate.py's ACTUATOR_WRITE_KEYS = ("setpoint_entity",), consumed at rule 1,
with a comment stating the guarantee outright - "there is exactly one such
key, so a second writer is not expressible in the options schema at all".
That was true and it graded THE SHAPE OF THE OPTIONS SCHEMA, not the writes.
Add CFG-04's per-inverter config - a roster of inverters each with its own
setpoint_entity - and there are two real writers with len() of that tuple
still equal to 1. The check stays green while the property it protects is
gone. sim/inject.py's two_writers scenario asserted on the same tuple, so it
went green too. That is this repository's named failure mode: a check that
observes something other than what it claims to observe.
Demonstrated rather than argued. test_validate.py part 2 now constructs the
hazardous per-inverter config, asserts that the OLD proxy is still green on
it, and then asserts the new check refuses it. Against release/1.0's
validator the updated sim scenario reports: "validate_startup_config()
ACCEPTED a configuration in which 3 declarations reach the ONE actuator
number.goodwe_setpoint ... the old proxy reports 1 write key(s) on this same
config and is therefore GREEN on it".
THE WRITE PATH IS NOW GATED ON THE RECORD
=========================================
Controller.write_refusal() asks Allocation.authorises() whether the single
allocator placed exactly this number, for this unit, on this tick.
write_setpoint() refuses anything else. A second writer with arithmetic of
its own cannot satisfy that - its number appears in no record - so it has to
file a Claim and go through resolve(), which is the one allocator. "Exactly
one allocator per shared resource" stops being a convention somebody can
forget and becomes something the write path checks.
The refusal is a SUBSTITUTION, not a return: 0 W goes on the wire in place of
the number nothing stands behind. Returning would leave the inverter latched
on its last command with the ESP32 heartbeat still being fed - holding an
unauthorised setpoint quietly, which is the outcome the gate exists to stop.
AC 1 is "refused at the write path, not merely logged", and test_clamp.py
part 7a grades the device's writes, not the log.
The gate sits BELOW the non-finite coercion and ABOVE the clamp. Below,
because a nan is loss of input and rule 1 has already turned it into 0 W.
Above, because the question is who chose this number, and the answer is only
meaningful about the number that was asked for - gating the CLAMPED value
would refuse exactly the cycles SAFETY-03 exists for, since a clamped write
differs from the allocator's share by construction. Mutation M7 moves the
gate below the clamp and turns nine checks red, part 6c among them.
A STALE RECORD CANNOT BE REPLAYED
=================================
Every Allocation now carries the `tick` it was made for. It is handed IN by
the caller - plan(..., tick=) - rather than counted inside the allocator,
because test_alloc.py part 10 grades that the module holds no state at all,
and a serial number incremented in there would be the cached-across-ticks
thing the envelope rule forbids wearing a different hat.
Controller.alloc_tick advances ONCE PER RESOLUTION, not once per loop
iteration, and both halves are load-bearing:
* a new allocation makes the previous record stale immediately, so a record
whose envelopes have moved cannot authorise a write. That is the replay
half (AC 2), graded by capturing a real record, running another real
cycle, putting the old one back and observing refusal.
* the "inputs missing, not yet stale" hold returns BEFORE the allocator
runs, exactly so one dropped meter reading does not zero the inverter,
and the heartbeat re-affirms self.target through this same gate while it
does. A tick incremented per loop iteration would refuse that heartbeat
and turn the hold into the outage it exists to prevent. Graded.
An UNSTAMPED record (tick None) authorises nothing: "I cannot say when I was
made" fails closed rather than reading as tick zero.
THE FAILSAFE CANNOT DEADLOCK BEHIND THE GATE, AND HERE IS WHY
=============================================================
write_setpoint() is also how layer 2 commands 0 W. cycle()'s two refusal
branches substitute a 0 W failsafe and write it like any other cycle;
shutdown() and the operator's stop button do the same. EVERY ONE OF THOSE
RUNS WHILE THE ALLOCATOR HAS REFUSED - ok is False and there are no shares -
so a gate that asked the allocator's permission to command zero would block
the safety write behind the very component whose failure the safety write
answers. A gate that can do that is worse than the hole it closes.
Resolved by authorising 0 W unconditionally, and on the VALUE rather than on
a failsafe=True flag: a flag is an assertion by the caller, which is exactly
what a second writer would pass; the value is a fact about what will be
written. The argument that this is safe and not merely convenient is that the
hazard §1.5 names is N-times loop gain from BROADCAST - handing every inverter
the same target so each supplies it in full (allocator.py's opening argument;
TEST-19 measured a permanent 4000 W p2p limit cycle at gain 1.0 with no guard
firing). At S = 0 the broadcast and the correct allocation COINCIDE: a_i = 1
for every unit gives every unit 0 W, which is exactly its share. There is no
over-command to make at zero. Said at the line, in write_refusal().
test_clamp.py part 7c drives it end to end through the real cycle() and the
real REFUSE_EMPTY branch: the allocator refuses every tick, the device still
sees 0 W, and the action log says ARBITER: REFUSED rather than WRITE REFUSED
so the two failures stay distinguishable to whoever has to debug them.
unmet_w IS STILL NOT ok
=======================
The gate reads ok and the unit's share and never unmet_w. allocator.py:179
says why: an allocation that could not place every watt is still safe to
write, and fusing them would let one saturated inverter park the whole site.
Graded on a record with 3800 W unmet and every share legal - mutation M5 adds
`or self.unmet_w` to the gate and that check goes red.
THE CONFIG CHECK, REPLACED RATHER THAN DELETED
==============================================
actuator_writers() counts WRITERS PER ACTUATOR instead of option keys. It
walks the options TREE rather than looking for a container called `inverters`,
because CFG-04 has not chosen that name yet and a census that guessed wrong
would go green while two writers existed - the same defect one step along.
Entity ids are folded to lower case so a second writer cannot be smuggled in
as Number.X versus number.x.
Two inverters with two entities are ACCEPTED - that is what the per-inverter
roster is for, and a validator that refuses the feature it guards is one
somebody switches off. Two declarations aimed at ONE entity are refused,
naming the actuator and every writer pointed at it. That includes the case an
author will meet first - keeping setpoint_entity as A's and listing A again -
because "they happen to be the same entity, so it is fine" is precisely the
reasoning that makes two writers invisible.
ACTUATOR_WRITE_KEYS survives ONLY as the enumeration a census needs, with its
guarantee comment deleted; nothing asserts on its length any more. Keeping the
name is also what stops admin/goodwe's current two_writers scenario failing on
an AttributeError between the two merges.
WHAT NEITHER CHECK OBSERVES, SAID OUT LOUD
==========================================
The census sees CONFIGURED writers. A second write path added in CODE - a
hass.set_number() call next to some new strategy - declares nothing and is
invisible to it, exactly as it was invisible to the tuple. That half is not
closed at startup and cannot be; it is closed at runtime by the record gate,
which does not care what the options look like or who called the method. The
two checks are deliberately different kinds, and only the runtime one survives
a schema this file has not seen yet.
EVIDENCE
========
* Full 18-file suite green on a purged tree (tools/mutation_run.sh).
* Verified by breaking it - seven mutations, each on a purged tree, each
reverted and re-verified:
M1 remove the gate -> test_clamp red (4 checks)
M2 make the zero exit an amnesty -> test_clamp red (12 checks)
M3 drop the tick comparison -> test_clamp red (5 checks)
M4 delete the census refusal -> test_validate red (3 checks)
M5 fuse unmet_w into ok -> test_clamp red (1 check)
M6 freeze the tick on the live path -> test_clamp red (2 checks)
M7 move the gate below the clamp -> test_clamp red (9 checks)
* AC 5: no existing check was weakened. The two edits to test_clamp.py are
fixtures, not assertions - parts 5 and 6c call write_setpoint() directly
with a number nothing allocated, which is now refused, so they say where
their number came from. Every assertion in both parts is unchanged, and
part 7f asserts that across part 3's sixty real cycles the gate refused
zero writes.
* admin/goodwe's TEST-19 norig scenarios (planner_binding, two_master_plant,
two_master_broadcast) still pass against this tree - they import the
add-on's control law across the repo boundary.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
186e13ceca |
ALLOC-01: allocate the site grid target, sum-invariant, never broadcast
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 4m6s
ARB-03 left `allocate()` as a documented seam that passed through at N<=1 and
DECLINED at N>=2, with the reasoning recorded at the line: the obvious
placeholder - hand the site target to each inverter - IS the ARCH-01 fault, and
"a placeholder that cannot be told apart from the real thing by any guard we
have is worse than no placeholder". This fills the seam.
WHY A BROADCAST IS A FAULT AND NOT AN INEFFICIENCY. The control primitive is
meter emulation: the master reports a FABRICATED grid reading and the inverter
regulates itself to it, so one number means "the battery moves X W" to this
add-on and "the grid is at X W" to the inverter - an identity that holds only at
N=1. Hand two inverters the same target and each supplies it IN FULL, so the
loop gain at the meter becomes N times the per-unit gain. Reproduced on
admin/goodwe's two-master rig against this tree: -400 W export overshoot at
gain 0.6, and at gain 1.0 - which config.yaml accepts as its documented maximum
- a permanent 4000 W peak-to-peak limit cycle, commands alternating
1000/2000/1000/0 W, with NOT ONE GUARD FIRING. The sign watchdog is evaluated on
every cycle and never trips, because the disagreement flips on alternate ticks
and never holds its 180 s window.
WHAT WAS BUILT. `app/allocator.py`, host-side and strictly above the driver
seam. It consumes intervals and a number and nothing else - no claims, no
priorities, and no measurement, because an allocator that read P1 would be a
SECOND integrator on the site measurement.
* ENVELOPE CLAMP, from ARB-03 stage 1's `UnitBounds`, read PER TICK. `plan()`
is a pure function and the module holds no state, so there is nowhere for a
construction-time envelope to be cached.
* WATER-FILL by weight, with the surplus of a full unit moving to the others.
Weights express PREFERENCE, envelopes express PERMISSION: a zero weight is
honoured while another unit has headroom and overridden when it does not,
because the SUM is the safety property and stranding capacity behind a
comfort choice manufactures a standing error at the meter.
* LARGEST-REMAINDER ROUNDING. The target is rounded ONCE, at the top; every
sum below that line is integer arithmetic, so it cannot drift. Measured: a
per-unit round() drifts -125 W over 50 000 ticks at three inverters.
* THE ALLOCATION RECORD, with `unmet_w`, `dropped` and a per-unit reason.
`ok` is one boolean for SAFETY-28 to gate on, and `unmet_w` is deliberately
NOT fused into it - a saturated inverter must not park the whole site.
THE STABILITY PROPERTY IS STRUCTURAL. With sum(a_i) = 1 the gain at the meter is
sum(a_i * g_i), a convex combination of the per-unit gains, so it lies in
[min g_i, max g_i] FOR ANY SPLIT. That is what makes the weights a comfort
choice rather than a tuning parameter, and it is why a bad split cannot
destabilise the site. Graded directly, and measured end to end: 90/10, 50/50 and
100/0 give a bit-identical aggregate trace at the meter, and a gain sweep to 1.0
at every split has a flat tail at all 84 combinations.
THE TWO REFUSALS main.py NOW MAKES, AND WHY THERE ARE TWO. `allocated=False` no
longer means "no allocator"; it means no safe split EXISTS - a mis-routed claim,
an empty envelope set, or a split that could only be made by commanding one pack
to charge while another discharges. Separately, and this guard is the price of
making allocate() succeed rather than something inherited, main.py refuses to
act on a valid split it cannot DELIVER: there is one `setpoint_entity`, so
writing the site target to the one inverter it can reach would over-command that
inverter by exactly the other's share. Commanding a partial site is a worse
instruction than commanding nothing. DEV-02 gives it the second writer.
scope_violations() IS NOW CONSUMED, AND AS A REFUSAL. ARB-03 left it logging
without changing the resolution. A mis-routed claim means the number about to be
divided may itself be wrong, and dividing a number that may be wrong is worse
than not dividing it - the same answer clause 3 already gives a contradiction.
It is NOT promoted into an envelope: a unit-scoped claim that landed on the site
names no unit, so promoting it would mean guessing one, or applying one
inverter's rating to a sibling that does not have it.
AT N<=1 IT IS A PASS-THROUGH, BYTE-IDENTICAL: the share is the site target, as a
float, unrounded and unclamped. All 17 existing suites replay unedited.
test_peakguard.py part 10h and test_arbiter.py part 7 were RE-AIMED, not
deleted. PR #40's reviewer proved that refusal branch was unreachable and
untested once; removing its trigger without giving it a new one would have
rebuilt the hole. Part 10h now drives three real cycles - a deliverable split, a
dead sibling, and every master stale - and grades all three.
KNOWN AND NOT CLOSED HERE: at a roster of two the loop's `actual_w` is one
inverter's power used as a site measurement, because the add-on binds a single
`inverter_power` sensor. That is the SENSING half of the same N=1 identity this
card removes from the COMMANDING half, and it makes the aggregate trace
split-dependent below gain 1.0. Measured with its counterfactual in test_alloc.py
part 8 and tools/alloc_sim.py --splits. It belongs to DEV-02.
Verified: all 18 suites green in the CI image. 16 mutations run through
tools/mutation_run.sh on a purged tree; 13 red, and the 3 survivors are recorded
in test_alloc.py part 12 with the reason each cannot be caught.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
38f6680639 |
ARB-03: pin all eight actuator call sites statically
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m45s
The independent review of PR #40 found AC 6 met at three of the eight claim construction sites while the check claimed to cover the class - this repository's named failure mode, a check observing something other than what it claimed, reproduced inside the check written to prevent it. WHAT WAS WRONG. Part 10g's only call-site check was a real two-inverter cycle. That cycle is auto, P1-healthy, no maintenance procedure, no tripped sign watchdog, the guard idle and arbitrage off, so it reaches `device`, `supervised` and `loop` and nothing else - three of the eight direct appends in `Controller.cycle()`. Its own check text nevertheless read "the line a mis-typed `actuator_of(...)` at a call site goes red on", and the PR body's mutation table presented it as covering the class. The reviewer proved the gap on the shipped tree: `actuator_of("maintenance")` -> `actuator_of("peak")` at the maintenance-shaping append left test_arbiter.py, test_peakguard.py and test_arbitrage.py ALL GREEN, while at a roster of two it built a site loop of -1500 W against the guard's site `lo` of 1500 W and the now-misrouted charge-only `hi = 0` - `lo > hi`, arbiter clause 3, 0 W IN THE BILLED QUARTER, SAFETY-25 §0a's fatal case from a one-word typo. The same mutation at the `failsafe` append survived too. The runtime detector does fire - `scope_violations()` names it - but it only logs; nothing graded it. THE FIX, over machinery already present. Part 10f's AST scan already reads each `claims.append(...)` in `Controller.cycle()`. All eight direct appends expose their actuator statically as `actuator=self.actuator_of('<literal>')`, so 10g now requires that literal to EQUAL the source the claim is filed under, read as SOURCE TEXT rather than evaluated - `actuator_of("peak")` at the maintenance append is the same VALUE at the shipped roster of one and a different string here. That pins all eight routing sites, on the line the typo is written, in every configuration and at every roster, exactly the way 10f pins the source set. Two further lines keep the scan from going vacuous: every direct append must be readable in that shape (a computed or hand-written actuator fails there), and the ten appends must still account for 10f's eight sources. The two INDIRECT appends carry no `actuator=` at the call site to mis-type. `peak_claim` and `arb_claim` are routed where their claim is built, and are pinned there - `peakguard.claim()` by the SWEEP_SITE sweep over every load x elapsed x battery x SoC x floor combination, `arbitrage.claim()` by test_arbitrage.py. 10g now says so at the line, and says which three of the eight its dynamic cycle actually sees, rather than rounding up. MEASURED, NOT ARGUED. Each of the eight direct appends mutated in turn to a wrong actuator - device->loop, supervised->peak, failsafe->safety, safety(stopped)->device, safety(inputs missing)->maintenance, maintenance(SET)->loop, maintenance(shaping)->peak, loop->supervised - each on a purged tree via tools/mutation_run.sh over all 17 files. All eight RED, every one of them on the new line. TWO SURVIVING MUTATIONS OF THE SAME CLASS, ALSO CLOSED. * `resolve()` did not have to honour the roster it was given: `if units is None:` -> `if True:` left the whole suite green. Ignoring the argument makes a unit that filed nothing this cycle cease to exist - a site of two reads as a site of one and stage 3 passes the whole grid target through to the inverter that spoke, which is ARCH-01's fault with its own evidence removed. test_arbiter.py part 7 now grades it on the one case that separates the two, a SILENT unit. Mutation RED in test_arbiter.py and test_peakguard.py. * main.py's N>=2 refusal was unreachable and ungraded: `if not resolution.allocated:` -> `if False:` left the whole suite green, so the right instinct was one refactor away from being deleted as dead code. The guard is KEPT - the alternative default is the ARCH-01 fault - and new part 10h grades it on the two-inverter cycle that already existed: the 0 W, the `failsafe` winner, the log line naming the roster size, and the write that follows. Mutation RED. AND THE WORDING CORRECTED. main.py does not "refuse to write" on `allocated=False`. It SUBSTITUTES a 0 W failsafe and then calls `write_setpoint(0.0)` like any other cycle. 0 W is the correct fail-toward-inaction direction and the log text is accurate about what it refuses - to BROADCAST the site target - but "refuses to write" overstates the code. Said as what it does, in the CHANGELOG, at the branch in main.py, and in 10h's own check text. `resolve()`'s docstring now says the roster argument has to be HONOURED, which is not the same as existing. 17/17 green on a purged tree. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
06f95e0a64 |
ARB-03: restore Claim.actuator and make resolve() three-stage
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m45s
specs.md:467 declares `actuator: str` as the FIRST field of `Claim`.
app/arbiter.py:55 had no such field. The specification designed
per-actuator claims and the implementation dropped it, so every claim was
implicitly about "the one and only actuator", resolve() returned one scalar
Resolution.target_w, and main.py assigned it to one self.target. THERE WAS
NO SEAM AN ALLOCATOR COULD OCCUPY - and ARCH-01 (specs.md §6.2, 2026-09-02)
decided the site grid target is ALLOCATED across several inverters and never
broadcast. This is a regression fix against the written design; creating that
seam is the whole of the change.
WHY IT MATTERS, IN THE UNITS THE SYSTEM IS BILLED IN. The control primitive
is meter emulation: the master reports a fabricated grid reading and the
inverter regulates itself to it, so one number means "the battery moves X W"
to the add-on and "the grid is at X W" to the inverter - an identity that
holds only at N=1. Broadcast one target to two inverters and each supplies it
in full; the loop gain at the meter becomes N times the per-unit gain, which
at the gain config.yaml:374 accepts is a permanent limit cycle with every
watchdog in §11.2 reporting healthy. And a per-inverter reserve filed as a
site `hi` against the peak guard's site `lo` is `lo > hi`, arbiter clause 3,
0 W IN THE BILLED QUARTER - the parked battery SAFETY-25's memo calls fatal.
THE SPLIT, VERIFIED AT EACH CONSTRUCTION SITE RATHER THAN ACCEPTED FROM THE
SURVEY. Four sources are about the GRID CONNECTION and are SITE claims:
`loop` (compute() regulates grid_w, the P1 measurement, and §6.2's whole
architecture is one integrator on P1 whose output is then split), `peak` (the
15-minute average offtake AT the grid connection, which is what the capacity
tariff bills - one quarter-hour peak per site, not one per pack),
`arbitrage` (buys and sells at the grid against a day-ahead price; the price
is a property of the connection and the energy crosses the meter) and
`safety` (both construction sites read: "stopped" is the operator switching
control off for the site, "inputs missing" is the site's own meter gone -
neither is about a pack, and both must stop every inverter).
Four are about a pack, a device or one write and are PER-INVERTER: `device`
(one inverter's own reported min/max - there is no site rating),
`supervised` (max_w caps what may be WRITTEN to one setpoint entity, §11.3,
so it is scoped like `device` for the same reason), `maintenance` (§12's
recalibration is a pack procedure - drain THIS pack, charge THIS pack,
recalibrate THIS pack's counter) and `failsafe`. `failsafe` is the entry that
needed the reading rather than the survey: SAFETY-02's EVIDENCE is site-wide
(it compares P1 against the standing command) but its CONCLUSION is
"the unit I am driving is pushing power the wrong way" and its remedy is to
park that unit. At N>=2 the same evidence cannot be attributed to a sibling
this controller never commanded, so a site-wide stop would park an inverter
this watchdog never graded. The reasoning for all eight is recorded AT THE
LINE, in arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE and again at each claims.append in main.py.
WHAT WAS BUILT. resolve() is three stages, each a separate function so a test
can construct a case at any one of them:
pre_resolve() - one inverter's own claims -> that unit's interval. Clauses
1 and 2 transposed: the unit's own winning SET gates its
own limits. The SET's value travels BESIDE the interval,
not inside it - folding a -2500 W drain into
[-2500, -2500] would turn "clamped to max_w" into
"contradicts max_w", a different and wrong answer.
site_resolve() - THE SHIPPED ARBITER, UNCHANGED. Same code, new name.
allocate() - THE SEAM, AND DELIBERATELY NOT AN ALLOCATOR. ALLOC-01
builds it. At N<=1 it passes the target through (§6.2's
identity). At N>=2 it DECLINES - no shares,
allocated=False - and main.py refuses to write rather than
broadcast, because the obvious placeholder (hand the target
to each) is the fault ARCH-01 was filed about and no guard
we have can tell it apart from the real thing.
THE CONTRADICTION IS NOT GUARDED AGAINST, IT CANNOT BE WRITTEN DOWN. The
partition is by `actuator` and it is a partition: a unit's `hi` and the site's
`lo` are never both terms of one `lo > hi` test. Constructed and swept - 40
filings (every per-inverter source x unit x bound, including a unit
contradicting ITSELF at lo 900 > hi 100) against a live site floor, and not
one moves the site target or raises a contradiction. A unit's own impossible
pair parks that unit and says so on its own bounds; it does not park the site.
That is SAFETY-25 §0c's table made mechanical.
AT N=1 THIS IS A PURE REFACTOR, AND THAT IS PROVEN RATHER THAN ASSERTED. With
one inverter the fabricated grid reading and the battery setpoint are the same
number, so the grid connection and the only unit ARE one actuator:
actuator_for() routes every source to the site, no claim is filed on a unit,
stage 2 sees the whole list and answers what the shipped arbiter answered.
All 17 suites replay UNEDITED above the ARB-03 sections and are green on the
same numbers; test_arbiter.py additionally runs 13 claim lists through both
resolve() and site_resolve() and compares target, winner, binder,
contradiction flag, the considered list and the operator line.
EVIDENCE, BY BREAKING EACH THING (tools/mutation_run.sh, purged tree):
* Claim's dataclass default emptied -> RED (test_arbiter)
...and it survived until the check was added: the two helpers pass their
own default down, so the FIELD's default never ran. Now checked directly.
* `peak` reclassified SCOPE_UNIT -> RED (arbiter x4, peakguard x2)
* `maintenance` reclassified SCOPE_SITE -> RED (arbiter x4, peakguard)
* the N=1 identity dropped in actuator_for() -> RED (arbiter, peakguard
incl. the maintenance/peak suppression checks, freeze) - which is the
measurement that says splitting at N=1 would be a behaviour change
* resolve() stops partitioning -> RED (arbiter x4)
* allocate() broadcasts at N>=2 -> RED (arbiter x2)
* stage 1 drops clause-2 gating -> RED (arbiter)
* a call site routes `device` through `loop` -> RED (peakguard 10g)
* SAFETY-25 Option B built as a ninth source -> RED (peakguard 10f, both
halves, plus 10g) - the tripwire still bites
SAFETY-24's asymmetry proof is re-run and holds: 0 negative floors over the
shipped sweep, `hi` still +inf on every claim the guard files, and it now also
asserts every one of them is on the SITE actuator - a floor bound to one
inverter's share would leave the site, the thing the capacity tariff meters,
with no floor at all.
test_peakguard.py part 10f is kept, not adapted around. `source` is still
Claim.set()'s first positional argument precisely so its AST scan keeps
reading it, which is why `actuator` is the LAST field of Claim and not the
first - moving `source` off position 0 would silently blind the tripwire that
guards SAFETY-25's deferred option. The one adaptation is `**kw` on its spy,
so main.py's roster passes through unread rather than being silently dropped.
New part 10g pins CLAIM_SCOPE to the same eight-source set and grades a REAL
two-inverter cycle, which is the only place a mis-typed actuator_of(...) at a
call site is observable - at N=1 every source legitimately routes to the site,
so a swap there is invisible by construction.
No config key, no option, no operator surface, no default moved. Inverter B
does not exist yet and nothing here measures it.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
|
||
|
Claude
|
b68f288fef |
TEST-11: pin the clamp guard to the write it reads
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m40s
check_output_clamp() sits one line below `await self.write_setpoint(self.target)` in cycle(), and moving it above the write left test_clamp.py, test_freeze.py and test_loop.py ALL GREEN. Measured on the move itself before this commit; measured again after, where test_clamp.py part 6 goes red and the other two are still green - the gap was real and it was only ever in this file. WHAT IS ACTUALLY LOST. The guard has two evidence sources. `self.loop_clamped` is set from the Decision well above the write and survives the move, and on the 10.3 runaway replay it is the source of every engagement the alarm reports (0 write-path engagements against 2 loop-side ones) - which is exactly what makes the move nearly invisible. `self.clamp_last` is assigned by write_setpoint() and by nothing else, is None until it has run, and is what `engaged_write` reads at main.py:856. Moved above the write, that consumer goes quietly false and a DEVICE-bound clamp - max_w above the inverter's own rating, SAFETY-20's install - is reported by nothing. A guard whose second evidence source can be silently disconnected is one refactor from being half a guard. WHAT THE CHECK PINS, AND WHAT IT DELIBERATELY DOES NOT. Not the position: the comment at that line warns against tidying SAFETY-03's ordering and SAFETY-18's into one rule, and a check a rename breaks is worse than none. It pins the CONSEQUENCE - what `self.clamp_last` held each time the guard consulted the watchdog - using a spy subclassed from the shipped ClampWatchdog over a slew-limited ramp where every cycle's command is a different number, so "this cycle's evidence" and "last cycle's" are distinguishable at all. The spy hooks `clamp_wd.note()`, the consumer, rather than the guard's name: that is what keeps a rename legitimate. The same assertions are re-run through a controller whose guard is renamed and whose write lives in a helper, and were verified against main.py itself - renaming the method throughout AND moving both calls into a new `_emit_and_guard()` helper keeps part 6 green; swapping the two calls turns it red on a line that names clamp_last. WHY AC 3 NEEDED A NEW STIMULUS, AND WHY IT IS NOT DRIVEN THROUGH cycle(). Through the real cycle() the write-path half cannot engage: the arbiter files the device range and max_w as P_SAFETY LIMIT claims, so resolution.target_w is already inside both bounds before write_setpoint() re-applies them. That duplication is deliberate defence in depth; part 6 now MEASURES the zero engagements rather than leaving it as a claim in a comment, and then drives the write path directly at max_w 5000 against a +-2500 W device - the wire carries 2500 W, every loop-side flag stays clean, and the alarm fires on clamp_last alone. With the two calls swapped the same stimulus clamps the same value and the alarm is silent, which is the ticket in one pair of runs. main.py gains one comment sentence naming the check, mirroring the one SAFETY-18's block already carries for test_freeze.py part 5. No behaviour changes. Full suite: 17/17 green in goodwe-addon-ci. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
d5b1ef19b3 |
CFG-03: give maintenance option defaults one source of truth
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m44s
Option defaults for the maintenance cycle were declared in three places that
could disagree, and MAINT-04 proved they already did. config.yaml shipped
`maintenance_charge_w: 2000`; main.py carried TWO `opts.get(..., 2500)`
fallbacks; MaintConfig's dataclass carried a third `2500.0`. So an options dict
with the key ABSENT was ACCEPTED by validate.py's rule 6 - which read 2000 -
and then built by main.py at 2500, against a 2000 W ceiling:
options dict with maintenance_charge_w ABSENT, max_w=2000
validate_startup_config -> [] (accepted, no problems)
MaintConfig().charge_w -> 2500.0
arbiter.resolve() -> 0.0 W, contradiction=True
That is the bug rule 6 exists to refuse, passing rule 6. It is unreachable on a
Supervisor install, which always supplies every key from config.yaml, and fully
reachable from sim/inject.py and from the test suite - which is where anyone
debugging maintenance actually works.
MAINT-04 shipped a TRIPWIRE and said so: test_validate.py pinned all three
literals and asserted the consequence through the real arbiter, so the
divergence could not silently widen or be half-closed. Its PASSING CONDITION
WAS THE BUG. Both it and validate.py's comment said to delete each other when
the divergence was closed. It is closed, so both are deleted.
THE DIVERGENCE WAS WIDER THAN ONE KEY. `maintenance_discharge_w` had the
identical three-way split (config.yaml 2000, MaintConfig 2500) and the card
named only the charge side. Closing one and leaving its twin would have
satisfied the numbers and left three sources of truth one line down, which is
the state that produced the bug. Both are closed, and so is the whole family:
all eight `maintenance_*` keys go through the same mechanism.
WHAT THE SINGLE SOURCE IS. config.yaml's `options:` block - it is what the
Supervisor reads and what the operator edits, so it wins by definition. There
is now exactly one in-code copy, `maintenance.MAINT_OPTION_DEFAULTS`, which is
TARIFF-02's `PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS` and SAFETY-24's `PEAK_OPTION_DEFAULTS`
pattern applied to the family that named the card - validate.py's rule 8 comment
already called that "CFG-03 read as a rule rather than as a complaint", so this
makes the rule hold where it was first broken rather than inventing a fourth
mechanism for one option family.
A MIRROR RATHER THAN A RUNTIME READ, and the reason is mechanical: the
Dockerfile copies `app/` and `run.sh` into the image and NOT config.yaml. The
running add-on cannot open the file it is configured by, so there is nothing to
read at 03:00 on a client's Pi, and a YAML-subset parser that could fail at
import is a new way for the add-on not to start. What makes the copy safe is
that test_maintenance.py pins every entry by READING the shipped file - drift is
a CI failure, not a comment.
EVERY OTHER SITE NOW DERIVES FROM IT OR HAS CEASED TO EXIST:
* MaintConfig's eight dataclass defaults are indexed out of the mirror. No
numeric literal survives in the class that held the third opinion.
* `MaintConfig.from_options()` is the ONLY place in the add-on that reads a
`maintenance_*` option. main.py's eight inline `opts.get(key, <literal>)`
calls are gone: moving the read next to the mirror means the fallback cannot
be anything but the mirror, because there is no literal in sight of it to
disagree with. It uses `key in opts` rather than truthiness, so a shipped
`false` or `0` is honoured instead of being quietly replaced by the default
- this card's own bug in a different costume.
* main.py's SECOND fallback site - the cheap-window charge floor at the
P_MAINT_SHAPE claim - reads `self.maint.cfg.charge_w` instead of re-opening
the options dict with its own literal. The Controller had already parsed
this once in __init__; asking the object that owns it cannot drift from it,
and the rate the shaping asks for can no longer be a different number from
the rate the state machine drains at on the same install.
* validate.py's rule 6 and its `maintenance_discharge_w` warning take their
fallbacks from the mirror.
WHERE THE RANGE LIVES, STATED AND CHECKED. config.yaml's `schema:` block carries
`maintenance_charge_w: int(500,5000)` - a fourth declaration site of a different
kind. It is a BOUND, not a default, so it is not this bug; but leaving the
question open is how a fifth site arrives. The decision recorded in config.yaml
and in maintenance.py is: bounds live in the schema block ONLY, because the
Supervisor is what enforces them and the Supervisor reads only that file, so a
Python copy of `int(500,5000)` would be a place to disagree and nothing else.
test_maintenance.py checks both halves of that: every mirrored key must have a
schema entry - without one the Supervisor drops the option and the add-on
silently runs on the mirror instead of the operator's value - and every shipped
default must lie INSIDE its own range, since a default the schema rejects is a
config that cannot be re-entered once it is edited. What the schema grammar
cannot express is a relation BETWEEN keys (`maintenance_charge_w` against
`max_w`), which is exactly why rule 6 is written in Python and why it does not
belong in the mirror either.
THE REPLACEMENT CHECKS, AND HOW THEY WERE VERIFIED. test_validate.py's new
section exercises the same four consumers the defect ran through, the same way:
the validator ACCEPTS a dict with every maintenance key missing; a REAL
Controller built from that same dict holds 2000 W (through main.py, not through
a regex over its source); `MaintConfig()` answers 2000 W with no dict at all;
and the real arbiter emits `-2000 W, limited by supervised(max_w)` instead of
`0 W, contradiction=True`. test_maintenance.py pins the mirror to config.yaml in
both directions - equal values, and full coverage of every `maintenance_*` key
the file ships, so a ninth key cannot arrive unmirrored - and asserts the
consumers move as a RELATION rather than against numbers, reading MaintConfig's
defaults back out of `dataclasses.fields()`.
Each new check was verified by BREAKING the thing it watches and observing red,
this project's rule:
1. config.yaml -> 1500, mirror left at 2000: test_maintenance 1 FAILED,
test_validate 4 FAILED.
2. config.yaml AND the mirror -> 1500: green again, and every consumer moved
together - MaintConfig() 1500 W, the Controller 1500 W, and the arbiter
`-1500 W, limited by maintenance(cheap-window charge)` where it had said
`-2000 W, limited by supervised(max_w)`. That is AC4: change the single
source and watch the consumers follow.
3. `charge_w: float = 2500.0` retyped into the dataclass: 2 FAILED in each of
the two files.
4. `opts.get("maintenance_charge_w", 2500)` restored in main.py: 1 FAILED,
naming the file and the literal it found.
5. `maintenance_hold_min` deleted from config.yaml's options block: 3 FAILED.
Full suite 17/17 in goodwe-addon-ci, twice, once under parallel load.
Stale prose that asserted the now-closed divergence as current is corrected in
app/watchdog.py, test_watchdog.py and test_peakguard.py - watchdog.py's example
still uses 1500 W, but because the point of the example is a charge strictly
inside the ceiling, not because 2500 is what ships.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e498dd4c1c |
SAFETY-25: pin the claim-source set, so the tripwire is one
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m53s
The durability claim this PR shipped was FALSE, and the reviewer of #31 disproved it by building the fix. Part 10 said, in four committed places, that it "goes RED the day a loop-side floor is built, so the exposure cannot change size under a green suite". The reviewer implemented the memo's own recommended Option B in main.py - a `Claim.limit("reserve", P_LOOP, hi=0.0)` filed under a `loop_soc_floor` - and the ENTIRE SUITE STAYED GREEN. Part 10 green. Mutation 13 went on printing "NOTHING PREVENTS IT, ON PURPOSE" and the same 21 % -> 10.0 %, on a tree where something DID prevent it. Pushed to an absurd always-binding 95 % reserve it was caught only by SAFETY-24's pre-existing part 7 wiring checks; part 10 was still green. THE CAUSE IS STRUCTURAL, not a missing assertion. `replay_loop()` hand-builds main.py's claim list as a literal `[supervised, loop, peakguard.claim(...)]`, so it is blind to any claim main.py ADDS - which is exactly where AC 2 would be built. That is this repository's named failure mode: a check that observed something other than what it claimed to observe, shipped as a guarantee inside the document that recommends the change. THE FIX IS 10f: THE CLAIM-SOURCE SET, PINNED, two ways because the two fail differently. * STATICALLY, over `Controller.cycle()`'s own AST. Every `claims.append(...)` in it must be one the scan can read - an unreadable append FAILS rather than counting as nothing, which is how a scan like this goes quietly vacuous - and the sources it can file must be exactly {device, supervised, failsafe, safety, peak, arbitrage, maintenance, loop}. A ninth takes part 10 red on the line it is written, in every configuration, whether or not any fixture here reaches the state that files it. * DYNAMICALLY, through REAL `Controller.cycle()`s with main.py's OWN `resolve` spied - not a list this file built and hoped matched - swept over the WHOLE 0..100 % SoC range in the two states 10a-10c replay. Idle: exactly {device, supervised, loop}. Floor-limited: exactly {device, supervised, loop, peak}. A claim conditioned on a low pack, which is the shape a loop-side floor has, cannot hide from a sweep that visits 0 %. And the fold is checked rather than assumed: main.py's two P_SAFETY rating limits are both symmetric LIMITs, so replay_loop() modelling them as one `supervised` claim at the tighter bound is exact. MEASURED AGAINST THE COUNTEREXAMPLE. Reproduced first on the unfixed tree (green, as reported). On this tree the reviewer's Option B at its recommended default takes part 10 RED on 3 checks, and the 95 % variant on 6. Nine mutations were run in all, each against a freshly copied tree with no `__pycache__` present, mounted `:ro`; all nine red, no survivors, no `+0 B` delta. MUTATION.md records why a second round was needed: the first round's mutations were all aimed at DISARMING the guard, while the claim part 10 actually made was about the guard being FIXED. The four false sentences are replaced with what is now true, and each says WHICH half catches WHICH shape - 10f for an arbiter claim (Options B and C), 10a-10c for a clamp inside control.compute() or the guard (Option D), which the replay drives directly. AC 2 IS STILL OPEN AND NOTHING HERE BUILDS IT. The loop-side floor was a test mutant, reverted before commit. The memo still says "Status: OPEN. This is a memo, not a decision." Also, non-blocking, from the same review: the NOT READY banner had inherited the new scope sentence and become a ~550-character paragraph that the row three lines below repeated verbatim. A checks() row may now carry an optional short `banner` form; the floor-limited row does, and `status_payload()` prefers it. THE ROW IS UNCHANGED - shortening that would have been weakening AC 3 - and rows without the key are unaffected. Graded, and mutated: dropping the short form goes red. Merged origin/release/1.0 first (CI-02), keeping both tickets' CHANGELOG entries. Full suite green: 17/17 in goodwe-addon-ci (test_ci_gate.py needs `git`, which CI-02 added to .gitea/ci/Dockerfile but the local image lacks; run with it installed and it passes). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
182102eeaf |
SAFETY-25: say what peak_soc_floor bounds, and measure what it does not
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m41s
peak_soc_floor reads like a pack-wide reserve and is not one. The
grid-following loop has no SoC guard of any kind, so on a sustained-load
evening it discharges straight past that number and keeps going until the
pack's own BMS cut-out stops it.
The gap has now been written down four times without being filed -
SAFETY-18's finding (freeze.py:18), SAFETY-24's module note, its PR body,
and its honestly-uncaught 13th mutation - and never once measured. It is
measured here, on the committed 2026-08-20 capture, driving the SHIPPED
control.compute(), peakguard.decide(), peakguard.claim() and the real
arbiter.resolve() in main.py's order:
19:00-22:00 UTC, 830 W mean, minimum 701 W, zero export in the window
reference pack (300 Ah x 51.2 V x DoD 90) started at 21 %, one point
above peak_soc_floor
ends at 10.0 % - the bms_soc_floor cut-out
1525 Wh delivered by the LOOP over 587 cycles
549 cycles below peak_soc_floor, 343 of them still discharging
0 cycles on which the peak guard filed any floor at all
AND IT IS A BEHAVIOUR, NOT A CONFIG VALUE. The same evening ends at
9.9715 % at peak_soc_floor = 5, 11, 20 and 60 - the shipped value and both
ends of the schema range - identical to four decimal places. The option an
operator would reach for cannot move the number by any amount at all. On
the same day's high-load block the two states coexist: 49 cycles reporting
PEAK GUARD FLOOR-LIMITED and, on all 49 of them, the arbiter simultaneously
granting the loop up to 2000 W of discharge.
WHY SAFETY-24 COULD NOT CLOSE IT. The peak guard files a `lo` limit - a
LOWER bound on the setpoint. That asymmetry is exactly what makes it
trustworthy: a reviewer proved across 19,800 combinations that it can never
lower a target, cap a discharge or contradict the arbiter. The same property
makes it structurally incapable of stopping a discharge the loop itself
wants. A floor on the guard cannot become a floor on the pack by being
raised, and the sweep above is that sentence measured.
WHAT THIS COMMIT CHANGES IS THE HONESTY, on the four surfaces an operator
actually reads. That half is required whichever way the open question is
answered, and it is the real misstatement on the live system today:
* config.yaml, beside the option itself - it BOUNDS THE PEAK GUARD ONLY
and is NOT A PACK-WIDE RESERVE, with the replayed evening and the sweep;
* DOCS.md, in the options table and in a new section carrying the figures;
* the STATUS-PAGE ROW for a floor-limited guard. This is the one line a
human reads at the moment the guard stops discharging, and read alone it
says "the battery is being held at peak_soc_floor" - which the replay
shows is false in every cycle that row is rendered;
* the PERSISTENT NOTIFICATION, which outlives the page. It now names what
has stopped (the guard buying a lower bill) and what has not (the pack
being spent).
peakguard.py and freeze.py carry the measurement beside the findings they
already recorded, so the next reader does not have to take the caveat on
trust.
THE PRODUCT DECISION IS NOT TAKEN HERE, and must not be. Whether the loop
gets a reserve floor of its own decides whether this house's battery may
discharge to the BMS floor on a heavy evening; that moves real energy and it
is the owner's call. DECISIONS/SAFETY-25-loop-soc-floor.md is the memo AC 1
asks for: the options, what each costs, what each protects, weighed against
MAINT-01 (a pack repeatedly at the BMS floor is the SoC-drift condition the
maintenance cycle exists to correct, and an over-tight reserve fights it from
the other side) and against the fact that this would be the FIFTH SoC key -
OPT-04's arbitrage_soc_floor fired SAFETY-24's "revisit if a third floor
appears" trigger unremarked, so SAFETY-27's naming decision should land
first. It carries a recommendation and says plainly that it is not a
decision.
It also records a trap found while writing it, and now CHECKED through the
real arbiter rather than described: the obvious shape of a loop-side floor
is a `hi` limit at P_LOOP, and filed while the peak guard is asking for a
positive floor that is `lo > hi` - which arbiter.py resolves to a
CONTRADICTION at 0 W, the battery PARKED in the one quarter of the month
that sets the bill. It is the same crossing-limits hazard
shaping_suspended() already exists to avoid. The ordering
`bms_soc_floor < loop_soc_floor <= peak_soc_floor` removes it provably,
because wherever the reserve binds the guard is already floor-limited and
files lo = 0; both halves are run in part 10d.
test_peakguard.py part 10 is a TRIPWIRE, not a guarantee. It records a
defect and goes RED the day somebody builds a loop-side floor, so the
exposure cannot change size under a green suite and closing it has to be
deliberate. Part 11's mutation 13 stays honestly NOT CAUGHT - nothing
prevents the loop discharging past this floor - but it now reports a number
instead of a sentence.
Verified: 16/16 suites green in the CI image. Eight mutations, each against
a tree copied fresh with __pycache__ excluded and mounted :ro, so no .pyc
existed to go stale (MUTATION.md's structural immunity, the same one it
records for CI); byte deltas +61, -8, -465, -430, -1088, -46, file deleted,
and -95; none is +0 B. All eight go red on the named check:
M1 peakguard.claim() also files hi=floor_w -> 7 red, incl. 10c
M2 control.compute() gain forced to 0 -> 6 red, incl. 10a/10b
M3 scope sentence removed from the status row -> 10e red
M4 scope sentence removed from the notification -> 10e red
M5 scope paragraph removed from config.yaml -> 10e red
M6 scope bullet weakened in DOCS.md -> 10e red
M7 the decision memo deleted -> 10e red
M8 arbiter clamps crossing limits instead of
reporting a contradiction -> 5 red, incl. 10d
AC 2 is left explicitly OPEN, pending the owner's answer.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
adminandClaude Opus 5
|
83911ed637 |
SAFETY-20: measure the freeze rail against the reachable ceiling, not max_w
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m37s
SAFETY-18's conjunction needs `abs(commanded_w) >= 0.95 * max_w`, but the
emitted command is clipped to the setpoint device's own [dev_min, dev_max]
range as well as to max_w - in clamp_to_rating()'s second stage and again as
the arbiter's `device` P_SAFETY limit claim. Measured on the shipped predicate
at the ticket's numbers, max_w 5000 on a +-4700 W inverter:
looks_frozen(unchanged_s=3600, commanded_w=4700, max_w=5000) -> False
The command is pinned at the hardware's rail, the meter has been frozen for an
hour, and term 2 is unsatisfiable by construction because 4700 < 4750. Any
device rating at or below 0.95 * max_w disarms the conjunction outright, and
the status page then printed `armed (... command is over 4750 W)` - a guard
that cannot fire, advertising that it can, which is the failure SAFETY-15,
SAFETY-19 and validate.py rule 5 all exist to prevent.
The rail is now measured against min(max_w, |dev_min|, |dev_max|), through a
new `rail_ceiling_w()` threaded into looks_frozen(), FreezeWatchdog.evaluate()
and both call sites in main.py. An unread rating leaves the old behaviour
exactly, and correctly: hass.limits() returns None whenever ESPHome is not up,
and on that path no device clamp is applied either, so max_w really is the
ceiling. A rating larger than max_w cannot raise the rail - this is a min(),
not a swap.
THE DELIBERATE CHOICE, since SAFETY-03 has landed. The arithmetic was kept
rather than substituting Decision.i_clamped / Decision.clamped. i_clamped is
the integrator bound (control.py:208, `bounded != i_w`), not "the command is
at the device rating", and `clamped` is the max_w output bound, unreachable on
a default install - neither is the device rail. More decisively, both answer
"did the LOOP ask for more than a bound", while the rail term asks "is the
command standing at the ceiling", and those coincide only when the loop is the
claimer that won. A maintenance SET or a peak-guard floor reaches the ceiling
through arbiter LIMIT claims with no clamp engaging at all, so a boolean rail
would go False exactly during a maintenance phase running against a frozen
meter - which freeze.py's own docstring names as the same fault with a worse
actuator behind it. The predicate is also public with two call sites that pass
DIFFERENT command values (self.target, and `standing` = last_write); a
per-cycle boolean cannot be passed per call site, so substituting it would
have silently decided the pre-clamp-versus-wire question that PM recorded as
still open. AC 1 governs, and it is satisfied literally.
The smaller of the two device bounds, not a per-sign pair. A per-sign rail is
tighter and is not wrong, but it is two rails needing two coverage verdicts on
a status row that carries one number, and the only configuration that
distinguishes them is refused at startup anyway. The symmetric ceiling can only
lower the rail, which widens term 2 rather than disarming it; term 1 carries
the whole no-false-positive argument and is untouched.
A ceiling of 0 W is NOT COVERED, not "armed at 0 W". A device that can command
nothing in one direction would make `abs(command) >= 0` true of every command
including a parked one - term 2 degenerately TRUE, collapsing the conjunction
into the bare unchanged_s > N threshold TEL-05 refused for false-tripping at
this controller's own operating point. rail_unreachable() returns the reason,
looks_frozen() stays silent, and the page uses the NOT COVERED row the
unsupported-transport case already has - a second reason to use that surface,
not a new mechanism.
AC 4, decided rather than assumed: NO NEW validate.py RULE. The configuration
is max_w above the device rating, which rule 2 (CFG-01) already refuses on the
identical predicate, re-run by run_control() once the real rating is known:
validate_startup_config({... max_w: 5000}, -4700, 4700)
-> ['max_w is 5000 W but number.sp accepts at most 4700 W - THE DEVICE
WINS ...']
A rail-specific rule would fire on a strict subset of that (0.95 * max_w >
dev_max implies max_w > dev_max) and could never be the rule that stopped a
start. The residue is the state where hass.limits() answered (None, None) -
ESPHome not up at boot, range checks skipped rather than guessed at, rating
never re-read - and there is nothing to refuse there by construction, which is
why the answer is a runtime row. Recorded in validate.py's "deliberately not
refused" list and pinned by four checks in test_validate.py, so the decision's
premise goes red if rule 2 is ever softened back to a warning.
HOW REACHABLE THIS IS, stated rather than glossed. Because rule 2 refuses the
configuration whenever the rating is known, min(max_w, dev_max) IS max_w on
every install that reaches the control loop with a rating it could read, and
this change is arithmetically dead there. That is clamp.py's argument for its
own second stage word for word: the case where it bites is the case where the
startup gate did not run or no longer holds, and a guard that quietly assumes
the gate ran is a guard that reports armed in exactly the state it cannot fire
in.
Verified by breaking it, per this project's rule. Reverting rail_w() to bare
max_w fails nine checks; deleting the NOT COVERED handling fails five. The one
that mattered: shipping the corrected predicate while NOT passing the rating
from check_meter_frozen() left the entire suite green, because nothing graded
the caller - so test_freeze.py part 5b now drives the real cycle() on a +-4700 W
device and asserts on the notification that leaves the process, and the
unwiring mutation fails three checks there. The peak-guard call site's wiring
is still ungraded (behind p1_enabled, needs a fed averager for `frozen` to have
any observable consequence) and that gap is named in the file rather than
implied.
Full suite: 15/15 in goodwe-addon-ci.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
504e8daac3 |
TEST-17: grade the status page's peak row at a stated month, not at today's
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m35s
release/1.0 went red at 00:00 on 2026-09-01 on a commit nobody had touched. `Controller.checks()` read the capacity-tariff peak with `self.peak.peak()` - no argument - so tariff.py resolved the month from `datetime.now()`, while test_tariff.py section 10 banks its quarter at the fixed fixture 2026-08-30. From 1 September the page was correctly asked for September, correctly answered NO_RECORD, and the row read "no completed quarter recorded yet" - a string containing no "peak", which the section's own filter required. Four checks failed. ISOLATED BY MOVING ONLY THE CLOCK. Same commit, same shipped-deps image, libfaketime: green at 2026-08-30, four failures at 2026-09-01. Identical at |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
9234016419 |
Merge release/1.0 (OPT-04) into SAFETY-24, and fix one grader the merge broke
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m36s
OPT-04 landed after the previous rebase. Conflicts were CHANGELOG.md and one IMPORT LINE in validate.py; both refusal blocks and both option sets survive untouched, and DOCS.md, main.py and config.yaml auto-merged. ⚠️ AND THE MERGE BROKE A CHECK THAT NEITHER CARD COULD HAVE SEEN ALONE. test_peakguard.py graded "the first `.decide(` call in main.py" and asserted there was exactly one. That was true when SAFETY-24 was written; OPT-04 added `arbitrage.decide(...)`, so the merged tree had two and the assertion failed. It failed loudly rather than grading the wrong call - the guard did its job - but it cannot ship red. Fixed by selecting the call by QUALIFIED NAME (`peakguard.decide`) instead of by position, and requiring exactly one of THAT. Other modules may now call their own decide(); this grader can no longer be moved by one of them. Verified still discriminating: a decoy `peakguard.decide` added to main.py turns it red on 7 assertions, and the `maintenance_soc_floor` swap still turns it red on 6. Also folded in the review's wording finding. An assertion read "a CONTROLLER whose SoC entity does not answer hands decide() None" while driving no Controller. The wiring property is stronger than the one claimed, and is now asserted on the SERVICE CALL: a Controller with no SoC never reaches the guard at all, because `inputs_ok` is False and cycle() stops at the safety claim first - so a `float(soc or 100)` defaulting line above the call site cannot disarm the floor. The original decide()-level check is kept, reworded to say what it actually grades. Full suite green on the merged tree: 15 files. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
bdd7f18a54 |
OPT-04: charge cheap, discharge expensive - and only when it pays
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m16s
Four cards built the price stack and nothing traded on it. app/arbitrage.py is §10.1's priority 3, and it consumes all four rather than re-deciding anything: whether a trade is permitted at all, on which two hours, against which widened threshold is TariffPlan.arbitrage()'s answer, and that answer cannot be obtained without first saying whether the peak guard is holding. §9.1's "peak shaving outranks arbitrage" is therefore honoured structurally - there is no path to a spread that skips the question - and again in the arbiter, where P_PEAK (50) clamps a claim filed at P_ARBITRAGE (30). A guard that never ran is not a guard that is clear. On meter_source off the peak guard is never evaluated; that third state is carried as None and refuses, because charging at the rail creates the billed quantity while nothing measures the quarter. validate.py refuses that configuration too, along with arbitrage armed with no price source and a SoC floor at or above the ceiling. §17: never export into a negative price. The guard is on the hour being sold into, not on the spread - a day priced -0.30 .. -0.05 clears any threshold and its dearest hour is still negative. Buying in a negative hour stays allowed. resolve_tariff() may open an HTTPS connection and the tick feeds the ESP32 heartbeat, so the fetch runs in its own task at a 30 min cadence and the tick reads an attribute and an age bound. test_arbitrage.py section 8 asserts that structurally on the shipped AST: a fetch put back on cycle() is red. AC4 is NOT met and is not restated - this repository holds no price history. Section 7 replays a synthetic year and asserts the property that does not need real prices: every executed round trip cleared its own widened requirement, and zero discharges landed in the 522 negative-priced hours. At the shipped 0.10 EUR/kWh threshold a realistic Belgian day/night site does not trade at all. Reported, not tuned: that number and FCST-03's widening factors are one product decision and it is the owner's. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
e709554857 |
SAFETY-24: an energy floor under the peak guard's forced discharge
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m29s
SAFETY-07 can command a discharge to hold a billed quarter down, and nothing below it consulted the state of charge. On the 2026-08-20 replay it asks for 878 Wh in a day. Relying on the BMS is not absurd - it is a real floor and it works - but it is the pack's protection rather than the operator's, and a month of aggressive quarters leaves the battery repeatedly at that cut-out with no EMS-side record of why. The first symptom is a pack never available when wanted, which is indistinguishable from the SoC drift MAINT-01 exists to correct. decide() now takes soc and soc_floor, both required and neither defaulted, and discharge_permitted() is the one place the question is answered. Above the floor nothing changes. At or below it the guard files a 0 W floor instead of a sized one - one-directional, so charging stays blocked and no discharge is capped - and reports floor_limited with the reason it bound. It is not a trip: every stop in 11.2's table still outranks the claim, and the floor is never negative, so 9.1's asymmetry survives as a property of the object (0 negative floors over 1296 swept combinations, SoC included). The SoC is graded only after `wanted > 0` is established, so it is never evaluated where it governs nothing. An unreadable SoC is floor-limited, not a full battery - a full battery is exactly the value that would disarm the floor, and this project shipped that defaulting once already. Failing to shave is not silent: one notification per episode (goodwe_peak_soc_floor), distinct from the saturation alarm because the two ask for opposite operator actions, plus its own status row and an action-log line. Verified by replay. The 2026-08-20 capture is driven against a modelled pack sized from the day's own measured appetite, so it genuinely exhausts: without the floor it reaches the BMS cut-out and holds there for 1227 guard cycles; with it the pack stops at 20.0 % and never touches the BMS. The energy withheld equals the energy between the two floors to within one cycle at the rail. The honest half is reported too - the worst quarter goes 4338 W -> 5030 W, because a floor-limited guard shaves less on purpose. Two new options, mirrored once in peakguard.PEAK_OPTION_DEFAULTS (TARIFF-02's pattern), imported by validate.py and main.py rather than typed as literals and pinned to config.yaml by a check that reads the file - so CFG-03 still tracks three places. validate.py rule 8 refuses peak_soc_floor <= bms_soc_floor at startup, in CFG-01/MAINT-04's manner. maintenance_soc_floor is deliberately not reused and not renamed: it is a drain target, not a spend limit, and the rename is recorded as a decision to revisit if a third floor appears. Eleven mutations of the shipped source were run against the checks; all eleven go red and there are no survivors. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
c2ed509565 |
Merge release/1.0 (TARIFF-03) into SAFETY-07
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m12s
The anticipated conflict again, and only it: both cards prepend to CHANGELOG.md's Unreleased section. Both entries kept, SAFETY-07 first. app/main.py and DOCS.md auto-merged, so the overlap claim on #18 still holds - config.yaml and validate.py remain untouched by this card even after TARIFF-02 and TARIFF-03 widened both. Full suite green on the merge result, test_price.py and test_static_tariff.py included. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC |
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
2d570d84ce |
SAFETY-07 review: defend the three wiring mutations that survived
The reviewer's finding was correct and the shape of it matters: everything the
first cut graded was in peakguard.py, and grading the module is not the same as
grading the guard. Three one-line changes to main.py's CALL SITE left all twelve
suites green while a default install parked at 0 W in the quarter that sets the
month's bill.
B2 was the serious one. My own comment described that defect - "that entity is
optional and empty on a default install, so until now the suspension could not
fire on the site that needed it" - and nothing could regress it. A comment that
documents a fix nobody can test is the same shape as a corrected comment nobody
tests, which this project has already been caught by once.
WHAT CHANGED
The suppression conjunction moved out of main.py and into
peakguard.shaping_suspended(), for the reason watchdog.loop_is_following() and
freeze.looks_frozen() live where they do: the check that grades a safety
predicate must assert on THE SHIPPED EXPRESSION, not on a transcription that can
drift apart from it in silence. Its docstring carries both terms and why neither
is sufficient alone. main.py's call site now says READ THAT FUNCTION FIRST, and
records that a reviewer mutated it back to its historical broken form with every
suite staying green.
test_peakguard.py part 7 gains a section that EXECUTES the three mutations
rather than describing them. Each one is put in place on the shipped module and
the REAL Controller.cycle() is driven with it, on the dangerous fixture: a
default install (no peak_forecast_entity, so peak_fc is None and peak_at_risk is
False forever) with maintenance in its CHARGE phase, so a P_MAINT_SHAPE `hi <= 0`
limit is live, and the guard genuinely engaged on the measurement. That the
mutations are monkeypatched onto the shipped module is itself load-bearing: if
main.py inlined either expression again the patch would do nothing and these
checks would pass vacuously.
SHIPPED suspended=True loop -> 1498 W, limited by peak +1497.8 W
B1 suspended=False CONTRADICTION between limits 0.0 W
B2 suspended=False CONTRADICTION between limits 0.0 W
B2b (forecast term dropped instead) - caught by its own check
B3 is graded three ways, because the single-cycle form is only INFLATED and the
failure is what happens on the next cycle:
* the value main.py actually hands decide() is recorded off the real call, with
the measured battery at 0 W and the command standing at +3000 W;
* the one-cycle difference is asserted to be exactly the standing command - the
whole defect in one line, watts that were asked for and never arrived counted
as if they had;
* both forms are then run forward against the REAL controller's own projection
with an inverter that never follows:
intent-sized floor 4482 5000 5000 5000 ... SATURATED at cycle 2
delivered-power floor 1482 1482 1482 1482 ... stationary
* and the call site is graded on parsed syntax, so a rename cannot quietly
reintroduce it: `decide(batt_w=...)` must unparse to `self.batt`.
SAFETY-24 is now named in peakguard.py, in its own section, with the number that
makes it real - 878 Wh of forced discharge on the 2026-08-20 replay - and the
statement that this must not go to a client install before that ticket lands. A
ticket nobody can find from the code is a ticket nobody reads before shipping.
RED AND GREEN
Fifteen mutations run against the shipped modules, each reverted after: the six
new wiring ones (B1, B2, B2b, B3, B3b, and deleting the SAFETY-24 pointer) and
the eight from the first round, re-run to confirm they still bite. All fifteen
turn test_peakguard.py red. Full suite green, test_price.py and TARIFF-03's
included.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
303525cfc5 |
TARIFF-03: static day/night and fully-fixed tariffs, first-class
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 2m43s
§9.2 puts a large share of the Belgian installed base on a static profile, and
an EMS that only works under dynamic pricing is an EMS for a minority. A new
`static_profile` option describes a two-period day/night tariff - or a single
fixed price - and app/static_tariff.py turns it into the same canonical
{start, eur_per_kwh, provisional} series the fetched providers emit.
Not a sixth provider plugin, for two mechanical reasons. capabilities() is a
classmethod, so a plugin's PriceProduct is fixed when the class is written -
but §9.2 makes STATIC and FIXED two different products and which one a site is
on is a property of the operator's data; StaticProfile.product derives it from
the number of distinct prices. And the plugin framework exists to stop a
FETCHED figure being marked up twice, which a number typed as all-in cannot be.
So the profile sits where §11.4 already says it does - under the providers, as
the fallback. Configured product and feed-is-down are one generator differing
in one flag, so the degradation path cannot rot unused.
"No arbitrage" is a type. TariffPlan.arbitrage() returns a variant whose
ALLOWED arm carries the spread and the cheapest/dearest hours and whose REFUSED
arm carries a reason and nothing else - .spread_eur_kwh on a refusal raises
rather than answering 0.0, so an optimiser cannot compute a trade from one.
Four refusals, all derived: peak guard holding, no price data, plan
provisional, or the series is FLAT. The last is AC2: a fixed tariff disables
arbitrage by arithmetic, not by matching on an enum. peak_guard_active is a
required keyword argument, so §10.1's priority 2 over 3 cannot be skipped.
Time-window shifting reaches the one shiftable load that exists: main.py's
cheap-window flag falls back to the static profile, and the UI gained a Tariff
row. Cheap is STRICTLY below the seven-day mean - `<=` would call every hour of
a flat tariff cheap, and 48 h taken on a Friday is two-thirds weekend.
A profile must tile every day type exactly once, checked at startup; a gap is
refused with the range named rather than filled in. `22:00-07:00 mon-fri` does
not cover Saturday morning, and that trap is what the check catches.
validate.py rule 7's stated reason expired exactly as TARIFF-02 predicted: the
test_price.py section 12 tripwire went red naming static_tariff.py. The message
now says what is true instead, and the tripwire is re-aimed rather than removed
- consumer set pinned, expired phrase asserted gone. Rule 7 also grew a second
refusal for static_profile alongside the HA price pair, the same silent-loser
conflict and a live one.
CFG-03 is not widened: static_profile went into price.py's PRICE_OPTION_DEFAULTS
- the one in-code mirror pinned to config.yaml by a check - and the new module
carries no defaults dict of its own.
Measured on the two committed days of this house's real P1 meter. 2026-08-20
(Thursday): 15.220 kWh imported, 9.606 day / 5.614 night, EUR 4.7185 under
day/night vs EUR 4.6725 flat, shifting saves EUR 0.8069 = 9.606 kWh x the
0.0840 spread, derived twice. 2026-08-23 (Sunday): 0.728 kWh, all of it
night-priced, which is the weekend row proving itself. §17 names six Belgian
scenarios; this is the seventh, and it is two days rather than a season - the
file says so rather than implying an annual figure.
All 12 suites green. Eleven mutations of static_tariff.py were each caught by
at least one check.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC
|
||
|
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5
|
616b62d3e9 |
SAFETY-07: cap the loop before it sets the month's billed capacity peak
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 3m7s
TARIFF-01 measured the quarter and said the consumer would be this card. It is
one new module, app/peakguard.py, and one new claim.
THE MECHANISM. Every cycle the guard projects the open 900 s block to its
end-of-interval average - from P1 telegrams only, never from the command - and
compares it to a ceiling. Over the ceiling it files ONE arbiter claim: a lower
bound on the setpoint at P_PEAK. That single shape is both behaviours 10.1 asks
for, a hard clamp on charging and pre-emptive discharge, and it cannot cap
discharge or export, because a floor cannot. 9.1's asymmetry becomes a property
of the object instead of a rule to remember.
excess = 900 x (projected - ceiling) / seconds remaining
floor = MEASURED battery power + excess
The 900/remaining gain is 1.0 at the top of the quarter and grows, so the guard
is gentlest where its projection rests on the least evidence. The floor is sized
from delivered battery power, not the standing command: a floor built on intent
re-adds its own unmet ask every cycle and winds to the rail whenever the inverter
fails to follow, and test_peakguard.py part 1 shows the two diverging.
IT TRIPS, AND THE CAPTURES DECIDED THAT. On the healthy reference day it engages
on zero of 95 quarters. The action is level-triggered, unlatched and re-derived
every cycle, so a false engagement costs one cycle of discharge rather than a
parked battery - the cost SAFETY-18 could not bound and this one can. Replayed on
2026-08-20 the billed quarter goes from 5029.8 W, above the inverter's own 5000 W
rating, to 3485 W, under the soft limit and without saturating. Quarters under
the limit across both committed days: 189/190 -> 190/190. Two days is not thirty
and AC 3 remains TARIFF-01's open item.
BLINDNESS IS CHECKED BEFORE THE PROJECTION IS GRADED, and it is a different
action. A fresh averager projects a confident 0 W, which is under every ceiling
there is; a meter gap longer than meter_max_age_s makes the projection read LOW;
a frozen meter reading export projects 0 W at full coverage. All three become a
floor of 0 W - no importing while the billed quantity is unobservable - which is
one-directional and cannot cost pack energy. That is the backstop SAFETY-18 could
not be: its alarm arrives at 300 s of a 900 s quarter and commands nothing. The
frozen term is freeze.looks_frozen() itself, on this cycle's standing command.
THE CEILING IS peak_cap_w, RAISED ONLY BY AN OBSERVED READING. NO_RECORD and
NOT_OBSERVED both leave it at the cap, so an unreadable peak store makes the
guard stricter and never looser. The gate is the reading's STATE, not whether a
number happens to be attached: today a `peak_w is not None` test behaves
identically, and depending on that coincidence is how a future last-known-peak
field would raise the ceiling off a read that failed. headroom_w() is
deliberately not consumed - cap minus peak turns a zero peak into FULL freedom.
TWO DEFECTS FOUND BUILDING IT, both in the interaction rather than the
arithmetic, and both caught by running the thing rather than by reading it:
* A LIMIT does not out-vote another LIMIT. arbiter.resolve() applies every
limit at or above the winner's priority and takes the most restrictive, so
the peak floor (lo >= 0) and the maintenance charge-only shaping (hi <= 0)
resolved to a CONTRADICTION and 0 W - the battery parked in the exact quarter
it should shave. Fixed by suppression, not priority: main.py drops the
maintenance shaping while the guard is engaged, which is what that branch
already did for the optional peak_forecast_entity - a key empty on a default
install, so until now the suspension could not fire on the site that needed
it.
* Thresholding `excess > 0` released the claim the instant it began working,
producing seventeen engage/release cycles in one 900 s quarter and leaving
that quarter 49 W over the limit it had spent fifteen minutes holding. That
is 10.2's oscillation. The threshold is now the floor itself, which is the
same arithmetic read as a level rather than as a switch.
PeakTracker.project() no longer reads a private name with a default.
getattr(averager, "_last_net", 0.0) failed quiet AND disarming - a rename credits
0 W held, the projection reads low, the money guard does not engage.
QuarterAverager.held_net_w is a documented public property now, read without a
default, and Projection carries it. TEST-13 item 4.
NO NEW OPTION AND NO FOURTH DEFAULTS SITE. The ceiling is peak_cap_w, the
coverage threshold is meter_max_age_s, the freeze predicate is meter_freeze_s,
and the achievable discharge comes from max_w and the device rating. config.yaml
and validate.py are untouched; 14's capacity_peak_limit_kw stays declined. On
meter_source: off there are no telegrams, so the guard does not run at all and
the status page says NOT COVERED - running it there blinded it permanently and
stopped every legacy install from charging, which is what the first cut did until
test_clamp.py's export case caught it.
test_peakguard.py: eight parts, all figures derived from the shipped config.yaml
and the committed captures. Part 8 runs seven one-line defeats of the guard and
reports which check bites; six do, and the seventh is reported as NOT caught,
because max(cap, peak) makes a zero peak the strictest ceiling there is and there
is nothing left to catch.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_015VXjA3LWccN1rJsk3okyPC
|