Files
goodwe-addon/goodwe_controller/DECISIONS/SAFETY-38-site-standing-pin.md
T
glenn schrooyenandClaude Opus 5 d5b9317d57
checks / unit (pull_request) Successful in 5m11s
SAFETY-38: correct the survivor count, which was stated four ways
Review found the summary lines miscounted, and one of the miscounts filed
a KILL among the survivors. The authoritative tables in §7e and §7f were
right throughout; only the sentences a reader actually relies on were
wrong.

Arithmetic, from §7f's own ledger:
  14 measured = 10 surviving
              +  1 already caught  (C3 allocator.py:162, red in test_alloc.py)
              +  3 caught by round 4 (C6 clamp.py:253, C7 peakguard.py:493,
                                      B12 arbiter.py:264)
Survivors by file: TWO in allocator.py (C1 :154, C2 :160), three in
arbiter.py (C4a/C4b :344, C5 :392), two in tariff.py (C8, C9), two in
arbitrage.py (B17, B18), one in main.py (B19). Two, not three, in
allocator.py - C3 is the kill.

Before: DECISIONS §6c said "Nine" while listing eleven; the CHANGELOG said
"11 SURVIVORS" while listing eleven. Both counted C3 as a survivor.

⚠️ KEPT VISIBLE RATHER THAN QUIETLY FIXED. This is this card's own
recurring defect in prose rather than in code - a claim wider than the
measurement beneath it - and it is the second false statement this ticket
has put into its own decision record. The correction says so at the line,
because a document whose whole value is that it can be trusted should
record when it could not be.

No app/ change; no test change. Full suite: 21 passed, 0 failed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BwRLw7eKYj2byVdwB6kbjU
2026-09-05 23:10:30 +02:00

926 lines
61 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters
This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.
# SAFETY-38 — pinning `site_standing`, the one quantity both site guards are asked about
**Status: DECIDED 2026-09-05.** `app/main.py`'s
`site_standing = float(sum(standing.values()))` is **correct and is not
changed**. What this card adds is the thing it never had: a **behavioural**
fixture whose per-unit shares **cannot** answer for the site, so that a change
of *meaning* in that reduction goes red instead of green.
Filed with SAFETY-38, card `6a9ac95f2b78646e5a76d2e9`. It is a **coverage**
card: not one byte of `app/` moves.
---
## 0. The line, and its two consumers
```python
site_standing = float(sum(standing.values())) # app/main.py:1598
```
`standing` is `{unit name -> the value THIS controller last put on that unit's
setpoint entity}` — `inv.last_write`, i.e. the number **after**
`clamp_to_rating()` has applied `max_w` and the device's own
`[dev_min, dev_max]`. Two safety inputs are derived from it and nothing else in
`cycle()` is:
| consumer | where | what it does with it |
|---|---|---|
| **[[SAFETY-30]]**'s site sign detector | `self.site_sign_wd.evaluate(site_standing, self.grid, …)` (main.py:1619) | **latches and stops the whole site** when the total command opposes the meter for `site_sign_disagree_s` |
| **[[SAFETY-18]]**'s freeze conjunction | `looks_frozen(unchanged_s, site_standing, max_w, …)` inside `peakguard.decide(frozen=…)` (main.py:1926) | takes the peak guard **blind** and files `floor_w = 0.0` — the battery may not import while the billed quarter is unmeasurable |
Both are P0 paths. **Neither was pinned to the reduction.**
## 1. What survived, and what the rescope measured
The card opened with three demonstrated live mutants, all green across the whole
suite. Re-measured in round 2 against `release/1.0` @ `86eaef2`:
| mutation of `site_standing` | on release/1.0 @ 86eaef2 | closed by |
|---|---|---|
| `list(standing.values())[0]` — one unit's share | **SURVIVES**, full suite 21/21 green | part 9a + 9b (this card) |
| `sum(...) / max(1, len(standing))` — the mean | **SURVIVES**, full suite 21/21 green | part 9a + 9b (this card) |
| `max(standing.values(), key=abs)` — the largest share | **SURVIVES**, full suite 21/21 green | part 9a + 9b (this card) |
### ⚠️ ROUND 1 SAID `[0]` WAS ALREADY CLOSED BY SAFETY-32. THAT WAS FALSE.
Round 1 of this card recorded `[0]` as **CAUGHT by SAFETY-32's package-wide
structural pin**, wrote that claim into four places, and told future authors
*"DO NOT RE-COVER THAT ONE HERE"*. It is wrong, and **how** it went wrong is the
part worth keeping.
**How the error was made.** The mutation was measured **once**. That single run
happened to hit `test_peakguard.py`'s [[CI-06]] flake — a **measured ~20%**
false-red rate — and the red was recorded as a **mutation kill**. Nothing else
was checked, because a red is the answer you are hoping for and it did not look
like it needed a second run.
**The correct measurement.** On `release/1.0` @ `86eaef2` carrying **only** the
`[0]` edit (+4 bytes, re-read from disk, bytecode purged by
`tools/mutation_run.sh`): the **full 21-file suite is green**, and
`test_peakguard.py` run **five times in isolation** on that same mutated tree is
**PASS PASS PASS PASS PASS**. The mutation **survives**. (The reviewer's own
independent re-measurement of the same tree hit the flake once —
PASS PASS PASS FAIL PASS — which is the same verdict plus a live demonstration
of the mechanism that produced the original error.)
**Why SAFETY-32 cannot see it, read off 12j's own enumeration rather than
argued.** Part 12j taints names *bound* to roster-carrying values and lists
*accumulated* in a loop over one. `standing` is neither: it is a dict created
empty at `main.py:1554` and filled by **subscript assignment**
(`standing[inv.name] = stood`) inside the roster loop, and a subscript store is
not a binding 12j follows. So `standing` never enters its taint set and
`sum(standing.values())` is **not a roster site** at all. Run 12j against a tree
carrying the `[0]` mutation and its enumeration lists `main.py:1553`, `1555` and
`1690` — the three `self.inverters` sites bracketing this code — and **not
`1599`**. No shape pin reaches this line; only the behavioural fixture below
does.
**The rule this cost.** `test_peakguard.py` flakes at a measured ~20%. A single
red from it proves nothing. Re-run it in isolation **at least five times** and
**name the failing check** before believing any red from it. This card is the
**third** measurement CI-06 has corrupted.
SAFETY-32's own disclosed blind spot says why the other two were always out of
reach:
> *SEMANTICS. `min` → `max` → the mean are edits invisible to any shape pin,
> permanently. Only the behavioural sets can see them.*
`sum` → mean and `sum` → `max(key=abs)` are **semantic**: identical shape,
different meaning. **No shape pin will ever close them.** That disclosure was
accurate, and is now confirmed by measurement rather than taken on trust.
`[0]` is the one that *looks* structural and therefore *looks* covered — and
that appearance is exactly what produced the false attribution above. It is
out of reach here for a different reason from the other two: not because the
shape is invisible, but because **the value never becomes a roster** in the
analysis's eyes. All three are closed by the same behavioural fixture, and
**all three needed it.**
## 2. Why the suite could not see it — habit 4, inside the site half of the very card that names it
`test_watchdog.py`'s `_sign_site` is the **only** N≥2 site fixture in the
repository. It runs at `site_sign_disagree_w: 320` with shares of roughly
−2500 W **each**. Every one of them is individually far over the gate, so on
those numbers
```
sum = −5000 W over mean = −2500 W over max = −2500 W over
```
— **all three reductions agree**, and a check whose two candidate answers happen
to be equal cannot observe a change that swaps them. That is `MUTATION.md`'s
third failure mode, and this is its ninth instance.
At a roster of **one** it is not a fixture defect but arithmetic:
`sum == mean == max == the one share`, identically, so all three mutations are
genuinely **equivalent** on a shipped install. No N=1 fixture can ever separate
them; §3c asserts that rather than leaving it to the reader.
## 3. The fixture, and the numbers it is built on
Two **simulated** units rated 220 W and 280 W, both obeying exactly, inverted
gain, house importing 2000 W. Both stand at their own rails, so `standing` is
`{-220, -280}` in roster order and the meter reads +2500 W.
| reduction | value | vs the SHIPPED 300 W gate |
|---|---|---|
| `sum` | **−500 W** | **OVER** → trips |
| `sum / len` (the mean) | −250 W | under → silent |
| `max(…, key=abs)` | −280 W | under → silent |
| `list(…)[0]` | −220 W | under → silent |
**Four distinct magnitudes — 500, 250, 280, 220 — of which exactly one clears
the gate.** The asymmetry is load-bearing twice: equal shares would collapse
mean, max and first onto one number, and putting the **smaller** unit first is
what keeps `[0]` distinct from `max(key=abs)`. The gate is left at its shipped
default so the fixture is graded against the magnitude an install runs; only the
**hold** is shortened (325 s → 2 s), because the hold is a wall clock and the
campaign behind 325 s is measured on the rig, not here.
⚠️ **220 W and 280 W are SIMULATED ratings chosen for that arithmetic and for
nothing else.** They are not measurements. In particular they are **not**
inverter B, which does not physically exist; B is a GW5048D-ES, serial
`55048ESU22AW0992`, **4600 W from its datasheet** (`goodwe/NOTES.md` §1.1b).
### 3a. The site sign detector
Shipped tree: the site latches, commands 0 W on every inverter, and the sentence
an operator reads is
`SIGN_DISAGREEMENT: commanded -500 W against a meter reading +2500 W …`. No
per-unit watchdog trips — every unit is faithfully executing its share, which is
the asymmetry the site detector exists for.
Under the mean and under `max(key=abs)`: **nothing trips, ever.** The reviewer's
tree was still commanding −500 W of charge into a +2500 W import at t = 595 s
with `following=True`.
Two counterfactuals sit beside it so the trip is attributable:
* the **same** inverted-gain site whose shares sum to −250 W — under the gate —
does **not** trip, so the trip above is the sum crossing 300 W and not the
mere presence of a second inverter;
* a site whose **device range is narrower than `max_w`** asks for −500 W while
only −250 W stands, and does **not** trip — see §5.
### 3b. The second consumer, covered rather than scoped out
`site_standing` is also `looks_frozen()`'s `commanded_w`. The same
discrimination applies at a different threshold: the site rail is
`RAIL_FRAC * site_max_w` = 0.95 × 500 = **475 W**.
| reduction | value | vs the 475 W rail |
|---|---|---|
| `sum` | **500 W** | **RAILED** → `BLIND_FROZEN`, `floor_w = 0.0` |
| the mean | 250 W | under → silent |
| `max(…, key=abs)` | 280 W | under → silent |
| `list(…)[0]` | 220 W | under → silent |
The sign is flipped from §3a on purpose: the gain is the **shipped positive**
one and the frozen meter reads import, so the site *discharges* +500 W against a
+2500 W import — the two agree in sign, SAFETY-30 has nothing to say, and this
half grades SAFETY-18 alone. Reusing §3a's inverted gain would have the site
sign latch park everything at 0 W, and the freeze conjunction could then never
be true: a check measuring the *other* guard's remedy.
⚠️ **The open quarter is backfilled with the same stuck reading, and that is
not decoration.** Without it the block is mostly uncovered, `blindness()`
answers `BLIND_COVERAGE`, and the mutant reaches *the same action by a different
route* — a check on the action alone could not then see the difference it names.
Seeded, the measurement is honest:
* shipped: `blind = BLIND_FROZEN`, `floor_w = 0.0` — no charging while the
billed quarter is unobservable;
* both mutations: **not blind at all**, `floor_w = None` — the site may go on
importing through a quarter whose billed average cannot be measured. That is
the capacity-tariff hazard SAFETY-18 exists for, silently disarmed.
The counterfactual comes from the **same run**: on the earlier cycles the
command had not yet reached the rail and the guard did not report SAFETY-18,
with the meter equally frozen throughout — so the verdict is produced by the
command magnitude `site_standing` carries and not by `unchanged_s` alone. A low
gain (0.05, the schema floor) is what buys those below-the-rail cycles.
### 3c. At N=1, nothing changes — asserted
A real one-inverter controller is driven through the same frozen-meter
scenario. Its `standing` has a single entry, so `sum`, the mean,
`max(key=abs)` and `[0]` are printed and asserted to be **one number**; the
site sign detector is still absent (part 7 counts the calls on the object); and
SAFETY-18 still reaches `BLIND_FROZEN` on that same value. The claim "the
shipped install is unaffected" now rests on the roster rather than on the
reader.
## 4. Mutation ledger
Every run: a **fresh full-repo copy**, `__pycache__` and `*.pyc` excluded,
mounted `:ro`, graded by `tools/mutation_run.sh` (which purges, prints the tree
fingerprint, and verifies no cache appears during the run). The mutated line was
**re-read from disk** after the edit and the byte delta printed. Shipped
`app/main.py` is 234 542 bytes at `86eaef2`.
| # | mutation of `site_standing` | Δ bytes | verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | `sum(...) / max(1, len(standing))` — the mean | +24 | **RED** |
| M2 | `max(standing.values(), key=abs)` — largest share | +9 | **RED** |
| M3 | `list(standing.values())[0]` — one share | +4 | **RED** — and **survives on release/1.0**, see §1 |
| M4 | `min(standing.values(), key=abs)` — smallest share | +9 | **RED** |
| M5 | `sum(abs(v) for v in ...)` — magnitude, sign lost | +16 | **RED** |
| M6 | `-sum(standing.values())` — sign flipped | +1 | **RED** |
| M7 | `float(self.target)` — the arbiter's site target | **−11** | **was a SURVIVOR — now RED**, see §5 |
| M8 | `sum(standing.values()) / 2.0` | +6 | **RED** |
| M9 | `sum(standing.values()) * 2.0` | +6 | **RED** |
| M10 | `sorted(standing.values())[-1]` — largest signed | +7 | **RED** |
| **M11** | **argument SWAP** at the SITE call site: `evaluate(site_standing, self.grid, …)` → `evaluate(self.grid, site_standing, …)` (main.py:1620) | **0** | **was a SURVIVOR in round 1 — now RED**, see §4a |
| **M12** | **argument SWAP** at the PER-UNIT call site: `evaluate(stood, against, …)` → `evaluate(against, stood, …)` (**main.py:1560**) | **0** | **was a SURVIVOR in round 2 — now RED**, see §4c |
**Every one of the ten `site_standing` entries is red in `test_watchdog.py`.** Re-measured in round 2
on `release/1.0` @ `86eaef2` (where `app/main.py` is 234 542 bytes, 2 022 more
than the `f72c48d` the round-1 figures were taken on): all ten still red, at the
byte deltas in the table, each on a fresh copy with the edit re-read from disk.
Adding assertions cannot turn a red green, so those verdicts carry forward to
the round-3 tree unchanged.
### ⚠️ ROUND 2 SAID THREE OF THESE SURVIVED. **EIGHT DID.**
Round 2 wrote: *"Before part 9 existed, three of these left the whole suite
green — M1, M2 and M3 — and the remaining seven were caught by SAFETY-30's own
N≥2 checks."* Round 1's wording was vaguer and harmless; naming three made it
**specific and wrong**, and it is the same species of error the round was
written to fix — **a survivor recorded as a kill**. This file contradicted it
three times on its own pages: the ledger row calls M7 *"a SURVIVOR — now RED"*,
§5 says M7 survived the whole suite, and `CHANGELOG.md` says so too.
**Re-measured in round 3, one mutation at a time, on clean `release/1.0` @
`bbc903b`** — a fresh copy each, bytecode purged (`0` remaining, printed), the
line re-read from disk, byte delta **and** `app/main.py` fingerprint printed,
mounted `:ro`, and the **FULL 21-FILE SUITE** run each time rather than
`test_watchdog.py` alone. (`release/1.0` has since moved on to `9e42cec`, which
merged [[CI-06]]; that commit touches `test_peakguard.py` and `CHANGELOG.md`
only, neither of which grades `site_standing`, so the ten verdicts below stand
on the tree they were taken on and this branch is rebased onto the newer tip.)
| # | Δ bytes | fingerprint of `app/main.py` | suite before part 9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | +24 | `362374cfb6486378` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M2 | +9 | `86573e7494f1c933` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M3 | +4 | `59fa8815e6fda4cf` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M4 | +9 | `43d852be3037f861` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M5 | +16 | `58d26de82af29a1a` | **RED** — `test_watchdog.py`, 3 checks |
| M6 | +1 | `407ddb5f375cc217` | **RED** — `test_watchdog.py`, 3 checks |
| M7 | **−11** | `2a635a4eca0a790d` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M8 | +6 | `b21eed89ff4c9240` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M9 | +6 | `0973d3caf680db65` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
| M10 | +7 | `0e7b7a4fed7787d0` | **21/21 PASS — SURVIVOR** |
**So: EIGHT of the ten left the whole suite green, and TWO were caught** — not
three and seven, and not the four and six a reviewer proposed either. The
correct sentence is: *before part 9 existed, eight of these ten left the whole
21-file suite green, and the only two SAFETY-30's own N≥2 checks caught were M5
and M6.*
**⚠️ AND THE TWO THAT WERE CAUGHT ARE CAUGHT FOR A REASON THAT MAKES THE CARD'S
CASE RATHER THAN WEAKENING IT.** M5 (`sum(abs(v) …)`) and M6 (`-sum(…)`) are
the only two entries in the table that **reverse the SIGN** of `site_standing`.
Every other entry changes only its **magnitude** — and `_sign_site`, the suite's
only N≥2 site fixture before this card, runs shares of about **−2500 W each**
against a **320 W** gate. `sum`, the mean, `max(key=abs)`, `min(key=abs)`,
`sorted(...)[-1]`, `[0]`, `self.target`, half the sum and twice the sum all land
on **−2500, −2500, −2500, −2500, −2500, −2500, −2500, −1250 and −5000 W**: nine
different numbers, all on the **same side of the same threshold**. The three
checks that fired on M5 and M6 grade *"the site trips and no unit does"*, the
claim it trips through, and where the latch is written — none of them grades the
**quantity**, and the sign flip reaches them only because it stops the trip
happening at all.
That is the whole thesis of this card measured rather than argued: **the
pre-existing coverage could see a sign, and nothing else.** Part 9's fixture —
per-unit shares each **below** the gate whose **sum** clears it — is the only
arrangement in which the magnitude is load-bearing, and it is what takes the
other eight red.
⚠️ **ONE FALSE RED, AND IT IS [[CI-06]]'s.** In the batch run M10 also reported
`FAIL test_peakguard.py`. Re-run in isolation **three times** and once more
through `tools/mutation_run.sh` — **four clean passes, zero failures**. The
batch script had discarded the failure detail, so the failing check cannot be
named here; what can be said is that the red did not reproduce in four attempts
and that **no claim in this card rests on it**. `test_peakguard.py` is the file
CI-06 records as flaky, and this is the behaviour it records. Believe no red
from it without three isolated re-runs.
⚠️ **ROUND 3 CAN NAME ONE, AND IT IS THE SAME FILE.** Round 3's own batch — the
ten full-suite runs above, plus §7's sibling swaps — produced **no** red from
`test_peakguard.py` on M10 or on any other ledger entry. It produced exactly one
elsewhere, on a **`static_tariff.py`-only** edit (§7b, A4), and this time the
failing check *was* captured: *"one cycle of the intent form is exactly the
delivered form plus the command standing on the wire"* — which is CI-06's
**mechanism 1 by name**, the cross-time projection. `test_peakguard.py` then
passed **four for four** in isolation on that same tree. That is the first time
this card has been able to put a name to one of these reds, and it is the name
CI-06 predicts.
⚠️ **M3 IS NOT "FOR COMPLETENESS", AND ROUND 1 SAID IT WAS.** Round 1 recorded
M3 as already closed structurally by SAFETY-32 and disclaimed it. §1 above has
the correction and the mechanism: `[0]` **survives** a full green 21-file suite
on `release/1.0` @ `86eaef2`, because `standing` is a dict filled by subscript
assignment and never enters 12j's taint set. **M3 is a real kill by this card's
fixture and by nothing else in the repository.** It is claimed here.
### 4a. ⚠️ The zero-byte survivor one line below the one this card pinned
Round 1 pinned the **value** `site_standing` and never pinned **where it goes**.
Swapping the detector's first two arguments at `main.py:1620` is a **zero-byte**
edit — the same characters, reordered — and it left the round-1 tree **21/21
green**.
What it costs is the banner. `SignWatchdog.evaluate()` formats
`commanded_w` first and `against_w` second, so under the swap part 9a's own
output reads:
```
SIGN_DISAGREEMENT: commanded +2500 W against a meter reading -500 W for 2 s …
```
The site is standing at **−500 W of charge into a +2500 W import** and the
**latching, site-stopping** banner tells the operator **the exact opposite** —
which instrument read what, inverted. `watchdog.py:658-665` names this failure
in its own words: *"a false statement about which instrument produced the
evidence, on the one line somebody woken by this alarm reads first."*
**Why round 1's check could not see it, and this is the general lesson.** It
asserted
```python
f"{sum(_share38):.0f} W" in _c38.site_sign_wd.reason
```
— that `"-500 W"` appears **somewhere** in the sentence. Under the swap it still
does: in the **meter slot**. A substring test cannot reach a failure that is
purely **positional**, and round 1's own comment claimed the opposite ("*would
put a different number in the store, the action log and the banner, and this is
where that shows*"). It shows the **number**, never its **position**. This is
MUTATION.md's *"a check whose data cannot reach the failure it names"*, in the
card that exists to complain about exactly that.
**The fix is one line and touches no `app/` code** — assert the **ordered
pair**:
```python
f"commanded {sum(_share38):+.0f} W against a meter reading "
f"{_mid38['grid']:+.0f} W" in _c38.site_sign_wd.reason
```
Measured: with that line, M11 is **red in `test_watchdog.py` and green in the
other twenty files** — one file, one check.
### 4b. Claim wiring, re-measured rather than assumed
Round 1's reviewer disclosed it had **not** mutated the arbiter claim wiring or
[[SAFETY-31]]/circulation. Both were mutated in round 2. Both are **zero-byte**
edits to `arbiter.CLAIM_SCOPE`:
| # | mutation | Δ bytes | verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| W1 | `"sign_site": SCOPE_SITE` → `SCOPE_UNIT` | **0** | **RED** — `test_watchdog.py` (parts 5 **and 9a**), `test_arbiter.py`, `test_peakguard.py` |
| W2 | `"circulation": SCOPE_SITE` → `SCOPE_UNIT` | **0** | **RED** — `test_watchdog.py`, `test_arbiter.py`, `test_peakguard.py` |
Part 9a's *"…and it stops the WHOLE site, through the `sign_site` claim by name"*
is one of the two checks that kills W1, so this card contributes to that
coverage rather than merely inheriting it. **W2 is caught entirely by
pre-existing checks** — SAFETY-38 adds nothing to circulation, and does not
claim to.
### 4c. ⚠️ The SAME zero-byte defect one call site over — and it is the one the shipped install can see
Round 2 closed §4a by asserting the ordered pair on the **site** banner at
`main.py:1620`. It did not touch `main.py:1560`, the **per-unit** call, and the
identical swap there —
```python
if inv.sign_wd.evaluate(stood, against, self.following, now) # shipped
if inv.sign_wd.evaluate(against, stood, self.following, now) # M12
```
— left the round-2 tree **21/21 green**. Measured: `app/main.py` 234 542 bytes
before and after, **Δ 0 bytes**, fingerprint `61aa413f…` → `e57e6026…`, bytecode
purged, tree mounted `:ro`, the line re-read from disk.
**Nothing behavioural can catch it, and that is structural rather than
unlucky.** `watchdog.disagrees()` is *symmetric* in its first two arguments —
`commanded_w * against_w < 0`, with an `abs()` gate on **both** — so the swap
cannot change a single trip decision on any input. What it changes is the
**sentence**. Measured by diffing the suite's own printed banners between the
round-3 tree and the same tree carrying only M12: **9 emitted banner lines
invert, in 3 distinct sentences.**
```
shipped: SIGN_DISAGREEMENT: commanded -2000 W against a meter reading +2000 W …
M12: SIGN_DISAGREEMENT: commanded +2000 W against a meter reading -2000 W …
shipped: … commanded +1000 W against its own measured power -1000 W …
M12: … commanded -1000 W against its own measured power +1000 W …
shipped: … commanded -2000 W against a meter reading +4000 W … (the N=1 arm)
M12: … commanded +4000 W against a meter reading -2000 W …
```
**⚠️ AND IT IS WORSE THAN THE ONE ROUND 2 CLOSED.** Part 9c asserts the SITE
detector is **not armed at a roster of one**, and inverter B does not physically
exist. So on the shipped install the **per-unit banner is the only
sign-disagreement sentence that can ever be printed** — in the action log, in
`_LOG.error`, in `status_payload()`'s headline banner, and in `sign_reason`,
which is persisted and read back after the restart the latch is designed to
survive. Round 2 pinned the N≥2-only call site and left the shipping one open.
**Closed by the ORDERED PAIR on both per-unit banners**, with both operands read
off the **observed cycle** — `inv.last_write` and `inv.batt` off the objects the
plant moved, never off the arguments the detector was handed, which would be
comparing the swap against itself:
* `test_watchdog.py` **part 3**, the N≥2 per-unit trip:
`f"commanded {stood:+.0f} W against its own measured power {meas:+.0f} W"`,
plus the persisted `unit/inverter-b/sign_reason` copy, plus a **precondition**
that the two operands are different numbers of opposite sign — without which
a transposition would produce the same string and the check would be
decoration;
* `test_watchdog.py` **part 7**, the **N=1** controller-driven trip:
`f"commanded {stood:+.0f} W against a meter reading {grid:+.0f} W"`, plus the
namespaced key **and** the flat rollback mirror, plus the same precondition.
**Measured after the fix: M12 is RED on four named checks in
`test_watchdog.py` and GREEN in the other twenty files** — one file, four
checks. M11 re-measured on the same tree: still red.
**⚠️ Neither §6a nor MUTATION.md disclosed it.** §6a's "what was NOT closed"
enumerated `circ_wd`, the eight other `CLAIM_SCOPE` entries, `actuator_of()`'s
body and the `n_units > 1` guard — not this. MUTATION.md's own closing rule, in
the file round 2 edited, is *"a variant is not covered because a near-miss of it
is."* §7 is the enumeration that would have caught both instances at once.
## 5. The survivor this card went looking for, and closed
M7 is not one of the card's three. It was found by asking the question the
recurring defect demands — *what mutation would my new checks NOT see?* — and it
is the answer: **−11 bytes**, and it survived every check above **and the whole
20-file suite**, because in every fixture built so far the arbiter's site target
and the sum of what actually stands on the wire are **the same number**.
They are not the same number when a setpoint device's own reported range is
narrower than its `max_w`. The `device` P_SAFETY claim is filed **per actuator**
(`actuator_of("device", inv)`), so it bounds each unit's **share** and never the
site target, and `clamp_to_rating()` clips again on the way out. On two units
rated 220/280 W whose devices report ±120/±130 W, the site asks for **−500 W**
and **−250 W** stands.
Which one the guards mean is already written down, in both of them: SAFETY-02
grades *"the command standing on the wire"*, and `looks_frozen()`'s docstring
says `commanded_w` is *"the EMITTED setpoint — what the arbiter resolved and
`write_setpoint()` put on the wire — not the loop's raw wish"*. [[SAFETY-20]] is
the whole card about the difference. Those sentences are now made to bite: on
the site target the detector fires on a site standing at −250 W against a
+2250 W meter — **under its own 300 W gate** — which is a latching, site-wide
false trip on an install whose inverters simply report a narrower range than the
operator typed.
## 6. Honest gaps
* **A mutation that changes the SIGN CONVENTION of `standing` itself** — i.e. in
`main.py`'s `stood = inv.last_write if inv.last_write is not None else
inv.target`, not on the reduction line — is **not** in this ledger. It is a
different line and a different card; §3a's obedience precondition would see
some of it, but that is not a measured claim and is not made here.
* **The freeze half is graded at ONE roster length (2) and one rail.** The
`RAIL_FRAC` constant, `rail_ceiling_w()`'s device-bound conjunction and
`rail_unreachable()` are `test_freeze.py`'s subject and are untouched here.
* **The site hold is 2 s, not the shipped 325 s.** The window's derivation is a
rig campaign (`DECISIONS/SAFETY-30-per-unit-sign.md` §3B) and this file does
not re-grade it. The **gate** is the shipped 300 W, which is the coordinate
this card is about.
* **Everything about inverter B here is simulated and labelled so.** No number
in this document or in the fixture is a measurement of a device that does not
yet exist.
### 6a. Round 2: what was closed, and what was NOT
Round 1's reviewer disclosed that it had not mutated SAFETY-31/circulation, the
arbiter claim wiring, or ledger entries M4/M5/M6/M8/M9/M10. Enumerated, with the
gaps left open stated rather than rounded off:
**Closed in round 2 (measured, on `86eaef2`, bytecode purged, edit re-read from
disk, byte delta printed):**
1. **M11**, the zero-byte argument swap — §4a. Red on one named check.
2. **M3**, the `[0]` reduction — re-measured, **survives on release/1.0**, closed
by part 9a and 9b. The false attribution corrected in all four places it was
committed: this file §1 and §4, `CHANGELOG.md`, and `test_watchdog.py`'s part
9 header (which previously *instructed future authors not to re-cover it*).
3. **M1, M2, M4, M5, M6, M7, M8, M9, M10** — every ledger entry re-run
independently in round 2 rather than carried forward from round 1's report.
All ten red; M1/M2/M4 re-run in the exact wrapped form the table records so
the byte deltas are the table's own (+24/+9/+9).
4. **W1**, `sign_site` claim scope — §4b. Zero bytes, red, part 9a among the
killers.
5. **W2**, `circulation` claim scope — §4b. Zero bytes, red, but **entirely on
pre-existing checks**.
**NOT closed, and not claimed:**
* **SAFETY-31's `circ_wd` detector itself** — its threshold, its hold, its
`circulating_w()` reduction over the roster. Only its **claim scope** was
mutated (W2), and that kill belongs to checks this card did not write.
Circulation's own behavioural coverage is `test_watchdog.py` part 4's and is
untouched here.
* **The other eight `CLAIM_SCOPE` entries** — `loop`, `peak`, `arbitrage`,
`safety` (site) and `device`, `supervised`, `failsafe`, `maintenance` (unit).
`CLAIM_SCOPE` has ten entries; only the two named above were mutated. `test_peakguard.py` part 10f grades the
classification statically; that is a different instrument and this card did
not re-measure it.
* **`actuator_of()`'s own body** and the `n_units > 1` guard on the `sign_site`
append at `main.py:1764` were **not** mutated.
* **The ten ledger mutations were re-graded against `test_watchdog.py` only.**
The "green in the other twenty files" half of the round-1 claim was
re-verified on `86eaef2` for **M3** and **M11** (both full 21-file runs) and is
otherwise carried forward from round 1's measurement on `f72c48d`. It is a
weaker statement than round 1 made and is written down as such.
⚠️ **Round 3 closed the other half of this**, but only in the *before*
direction: all ten were re-run on clean `release/1.0` @ `bbc903b` under the
**full 21-file suite** to establish which of them the pre-existing coverage
could see — see §4's ⚠️ paragraph, and the answer was **eight survivors, not
three**. The *after* direction — "each of the ten is red in
`test_watchdog.py` and green in the other twenty **on the round-3 tree**" —
is still measured end-to-end only for **M3, M11 and M12**. For the other
seven, "red" carries forward from round 2 (which adding assertions cannot
undo) and "green elsewhere" carries forward from round 1.
* **`test_peakguard.py`'s CI-06 flake is not fixed by this card** and is not
this card's subject. It is *characterised* here (five isolated runs on the M3
tree, all PASS) only far enough to overturn the false kill it produced.
### 6b. Round 3: what was closed, and what is still open
**Closed in round 3:**
1. **M12**, the zero-byte argument swap at the **per-unit** call site
`main.py:1560` — §4c. It was a survivor of the round-2 tree at **21/21
green**, and it is the **only** sign-disagreement banner a shipped
one-inverter install can print. Red on four named checks, green in the other
twenty files.
2. **The ledger arithmetic in §4**, which round 2 made specific and wrong. See
§4's own ⚠️ paragraph: re-measured mutation by mutation on clean
`release/1.0` @ `bbc903b`, full 21-file suite each time.
3. **The family itself is now enumerated by machine** —
`tools/symmetric_message_scan.py`, §7 — rather than by hand for a third time.
**Open, named, and NOT claimed:**
* **A3 and B1** — the only two status-page rows in which the freeze detector
ever names a device range: the **NOT COVERED** row and the **armed** row's
"below max_w because …" clause. `rail_unreachable()`'s `dev_min`/`dev_max` at `main.py:3208` and the
literal `f"only {inv.dev_min}...{inv.dev_max} W"` at `main.py:3231`. Both
measured: **0 bytes each, 21/21 green each.** Real, open members of the
family. They are **status-page rows rather than latching alarms**, and closing
them wants a fixture with a device whose two bounds are **asymmetric** — every
fixture in this repository uses `±d`, so the transposition is currently
invisible by construction — which belongs to `test_freeze.py`'s card, not to
this one.
* **Twelve census-B sites** (§7c, B2–B12) determined unpinned at the **source
level** — the distinguishing literal appears in no `test_*.py` — and **not**
mutated. Weaker evidence than A1–A4 and B1, and written down as such
— §7d says the same thing with the same list.
* **B6**, SAFETY-31's `circ_reason`, is the same shape as the defect this card
closed for SAFETY-02/30 and is *also* persisted and re-read after a restart.
§6a already declines to touch `circ_wd`; §7d says what that costs.
* Everything §6a lists stays open: `circ_wd`'s own thresholds, the eight other
`CLAIM_SCOPE` entries, `actuator_of()`'s body, and the `n_units > 1` guard.
### 6c. Round 4: what was closed, and what is still open
**The blocker round 3 shipped.** The enumeration read as complete and covered
**one syntactic sink**. Every one of census B's 16 members was a sentence that
is **appended, assigned, or passed as a log argument** (`problems.append`,
`out.append({"text": …})`, `self.reason = …`, `_LOG.info`). **Not one was a
sentence that is RETURNED.** Census A has a return bucket, but only for
symmetric **parameters**, so a method formatting its **own attributes** and
handing the string back was invisible to both — and `describe()` / `explain()` /
the reason-builders are exactly where this codebase keeps its operator
sentences. Worse than the gap: it was in **none of the five blind spots the tool
prints about itself**. A tool that asserts a completeness it does not have is
the recurring defect wearing a new hat.
**Closed in round 4:**
1. **`clamp.py:253` `ClampResult.describe()`**, pair `requested_w` /
`applied_w` — §7e C6. A survivor of the round-3 tree at **21/21 green**,
**0 bytes**. It is the §15 action-log row at `main.py:1366` **and** the
ClampWatchdog notification reason at `main.py:2452`; **no `test_*.py`
mentioned `describe()` at all.** Pinned on the ordered pair, on the
contiguous literal, at **both** consumers, with a precondition that the two
operands render differently — `test_clamp.py` part 6d. **4 checks red** under
the transposition.
2. **`peakguard.py:493` `PeakDecision.explain()`**, pair `projected_w` /
`ceiling_w` — §7e C7. Same measurement: **0 bytes, 21/21 green**; the string
`"peak guard idle"` was in no `test_*.py`. Pinned on the decision and on the
shipped status row at `main.py:3313` — `test_peakguard.py` part 13. **3
checks red.**
3. **`arbiter.py:264` (B12)** — the check whose **claim was wider than its
assertion**, carried forward from §7d. Measured this round rather than left
at source level: **0 bytes, 21/21 green** before, **`test_arbiter.py` red**
after. **2 checks red.**
4. **The tool's sinks are now stated rather than implied.** It prints what it
scans as a MESSAGE, that it now scans the RETURN sink through the returning
method's call sites, and — the part that was missing — **an explicit list of
what it does not scan at all**, largest hole first.
**⚠️ The correction round 4 owes the ticket.** The brief placed
`PeakDecision.explain()`'s idle sentence at `main.py:3299/3302`. Those two lines
are the **floor-limited** branch, where `explain()` returns `self.reason` before
the idle literal is ever built. The idle sentence reaches the page at
**`main.py:3313`** and the action log at **`main.py:1951`** (edge-logged, so it
is the RELEASE edge that writes it). The pin is on 3313; 1951 is disclosed
below, unpinned.
**Open, named, and measured — see §7f for the ledger:**
* **TEN further zero-byte survivors** found by the widened scan, each measured
at 21/21 green on this tree: **two** in `allocator.py`'s `UnitPlan.explain()`
(C1 :154, C2 :160), three in `arbiter.py`'s two `explain()`s (C4a, C4b :344,
C5 :392), two in `tariff.py` (C8, C9), two in `arbitrage.py`'s trade reasons
(B17, B18) and one in `main.py`'s SoC-floor notification (B19).
None is a control decision; every one is a sentence an operator reads.
⚠️ **CORRECTED after review, and the error is worth keeping visible.** This
bullet first said "Nine" while listing eleven, and the CHANGELOG said eleven
while listing eleven — and BOTH counted `allocator.py:162` (C3) among the
survivors when §7f records it as a KILL, red in `test_alloc.py`. The
authoritative tables in §7e and §7f were right throughout; only the summary
sentences a reader actually relies on were wrong. That is this card's own
recurring defect in prose rather than in code: a claim wider than the
measurement beneath it. Arithmetic, from §7f: 14 measured = 10 surviving +
1 already caught (C3) + 3 caught by this round (C6, C7, B12).
* **The action-log surface of the peak-guard idle line** (`main.py:1951`) is
not pinned. The status row (3313) is, and both come off the same `explain()`,
so the *sentence* is closed and the *second call site* is not — which is
precisely the distinction §4c was written about, recorded rather than assumed.
* Everything §6a and §6b list stays open.
## 7. The symmetric-predicate family — every call whose argument order is load-bearing for a MESSAGE
**Why this section exists, and it is the most useful thing in the card.** Round 2
pinned the operand order of `SignWatchdog.evaluate()` at `main.py:1620`. Round 3
found the **identical zero-byte defect at `main.py:1560`**, one call site over —
and that one is worse, because `test_watchdog.py` part 9c asserts the site
detector is **never armed at
a roster of one**, so on the shipped install the per-unit banner is the **only**
sign-disagreement sentence that can ever be printed. Twice in one card the
enumeration was written by hand and twice it was short. MUTATION.md habit 12: *a
hand-written scope is the same defect as a hand-written fixture.* So the family
is now **computed**, by `tools/symmetric_message_scan.py`.
### 7a. What makes this family invisible, and why it is not a fixture problem
Every other defect in this document is a fixture problem: *no fixture happens to
separate the mutant from the shipped code.* Build the right fixture and it goes
red. This one is not that.
Where a callee is **symmetric** in two arguments, a swap at a call site cannot
change **any** action on **any** input. `watchdog.disagrees()` is
`commanded_w * against_w < 0` with an `abs()` gate on **both** sides: the
product commutes and the two gates are the same gate. There is nothing for a
behavioural check to observe, ever — **not "no fixture separates them" but no
fixture *can*.** The only surface that moves is the **sentence**, and the only
check that can see it is one asserting the **ordered pair** (MUTATION.md habit
14) at **that** call site.
Two consequences the earlier rounds got wrong:
* **The unit of coverage is the CALL SITE, not the function.** `evaluate()`'s
operand order was pinned and the defect still shipped, because the pin was on
the *other* call.
* **A behavioural suite is not weak evidence here, it is NO evidence.** "21/21
green" is what this mutation is *guaranteed* to produce. Measured, twice: M11
at `main.py:1620` on the round-1 tree, and M12 at `main.py:1560` on the
round-2 tree.
### 7b. Census A — the callee formats its own parameters
`tools/symmetric_message_scan.py` renames each parameter pair, erases every
formatted string, canonicalises the commutative operators (`*`, `+`, `and`,
`or`, `==`, `min`/`max`, iterated tuple literals) and compares the **bodies**;
it iterates to a **fixpoint**, because the symmetry is usually one call deep —
`evaluate()` is symmetric only *through* `disagrees()`, and a single pass
reports an empty family on a tree whose answer is already known. It then
classifies each sentence by **where it goes**.
Fixpoint on this tree: **3 rounds, 17 interchangeable positional and 5 keyword
pairs across 14 functions**. 45 parameter pairs reach a sentence; **8** are
symmetric — **5** whose sentence goes only to an operator, and **3** whose
sentence is the **return value** and therefore has to be classified by hand,
because a returned string is sometimes a KEY and sometimes a SENTENCE.
| # | scan row | pair | called at | swap costs | reaches an operator via | pinned? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| **A1** | `watchdog.py:613` `SignWatchdog.evaluate()` | `(commanded_w, against_w)` | **`main.py:1560`** — per-unit, **and the N=1 detector** | **0 B** | `sign_reason` (persisted), the action log, `_LOG.error`, `status_payload()`'s headline banner | **YES — round 3.** `test_watchdog.py` part 3 (`its own measured power`) and part 7 (`a meter reading`), on the contiguous literal with both operands read off the observed cycle. **Measured: 0 B, red on 4 named checks, green in the other 20 files.** |
| **A2** | same row, second call site | `(commanded_w, against_w)` | **`main.py:1620`** — site | **0 B** | `site_sign_reason`, the action log, the status page | **YES — round 2**, part 9a. Re-measured on the round-3 tree: still red. |
| **A3** | `freeze.py:405` `FreezeWatchdog.evaluate()` and `freeze.py:311` `rail_unreachable()` — both symmetric through `rail_ceiling_w()`'s `for bound in (dev_min, dev_max)` | `(dev_min, dev_max)` | **`main.py:3208`** (and 1928, 2755, 3196, 3219) | **0 B** | the status page's `freeze detector: NOT COVERED — the setpoint device reports a range of …` row | **NO.** Measured: swapped at `main.py:3208-3209`, **0 bytes**, `main.py` fingerprint `61aa413f…` → `2305b560…`, **21/21 green**. Disclosed in §7d, not closed. ⚠️ `rail_unreachable()` is the row the scan puts in its **RETURN** bucket: its returned string is a **sentence**, not a key, so it is a family member after all — which is exactly why that bucket says *read by hand*. |
| **A4** | `static_tariff.py:522` `_raise_gap()` | `(start, end)` | `static_tariff.py:509`, `:513` | **0 B** | the `ProfileInvalid` refusal an operator reads at startup | **YES — pre-existing.** Measured: both call sites swapped, **0 bytes**, `static_tariff.py` fingerprint `caef7fde…` → `50e9a768…`, **red in `test_static_tariff.py` on two named checks** (*"…and names the uncovered range so the operator can fix it"*, *"…and the refusal names the uncovered range"*), because `_hhmm(start)}-{_hhmm(end)` is asserted as the contiguous literal `"22:00-23:00"`. ⚠️ That batch run also reported `FAIL test_peakguard.py` on a `static_tariff.py`-only edit; the failing check is *"one cycle of the intent form is exactly the delivered form plus the command standing on the wire"*, which is [[CI-06]]'s **mechanism 1 by name**, and `test_peakguard.py` passes **four for four** in isolation on that same tree. No claim here rests on it. |
| A5–A6 | `static_tariff.py:522` `_raise_gap()` | `(start, weekday)`, `(end, weekday)` | — | — | — | **not real — the scan's one over-report.** It erases the sentence, so it cannot see that `DAY_NAMES[start]` with `start = 1320` raises `IndexError`. A mixed-type pair fails loudly, which is the opposite of this family. |
| A7–A8 | `store.py:177` `unit_key()`, `mqtt.py:222` `unit_state_key()` | `(unit, key)`, `(slug, key)` | many | 0 B | — | **not this family.** The formatted string is the **return value and it is a KEY**: a swap renames a store key and an MQTT topic, which is behaviour every ordinary check can see. MAINT-05 is the card about it. |
### 7c. Census B — the caller builds the sentence
Census A only sees a callee formatting its **own** parameters, which was gap 2
of its own honest-gap list. The other half never crosses a function boundary:
an operator sentence built where it is printed, interpolating two values that
are **interchangeable by shape**. No predicate is involved at all, so census A's
symmetry test has nothing to test. The scan pairs interpolated expressions that
are **one leaf apart** — `inv.dev_min` / `inv.dev_max`, `cfg.min_w` /
`cfg.hold_s` — which is exactly what a transposition swaps, and it keeps only
sentences whose sink is a **message**: an f-string that becomes a URL or a store
key is data, and a swap there is an ordinary behavioural change. **16 candidates** in round 3, every one of them a **zero-byte** edit — and **22** after round 4 widened the sink classifier (B17–B22 below):
| # | site | pair | reaches an operator as | pinned? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| **B1** | `main.py:3231` | `inv.dev_min` / `inv.dev_max` | status page, `… accepts only −120…130 W` | **NO — MEASURED.** Transposed in place, **0 bytes**, `main.py` fingerprint `61aa413f…` → `ac36a97b…`, purged, `:ro`, **21/21 green**. The row then tells the operator the device accepts `130…−120 W`. |
| **B2** | `main.py:3362` | `inv.dev_min` / `inv.dev_max` | status page, `setpoint … (range −120…130 W)` | **NO** — the literal `setpoint … (range` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B3** | `main.py:3435` | `sign_wd.cfg.hold_s` / `.cfg.min_w` | status page, `sign watchdog: armed (trips after 180 s opposed, both over 300 W)` | **NO** — `s opposed` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B4** | `main.py:3460` | `site_sign_wd.cfg.hold_s` / `.min_w` | status page, the site sign row | **NO** — `armed against the sum` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B5** | `main.py:3491` | `circ_wd.cfg.hold_s` / `.min_w` | status page, the circulation row | **NO** — `circulation watchdog: armed` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B6** | `circulation.py:317` | `cfg.min_w` / `cfg.hold_s` | **`circ_reason` — persisted, and re-read after a restart** | **NO** — `test_watchdog.py` asserts only `"CIRCULATING_POWER" in reason`. **This is SAFETY-31's twin of the exact defect this card just closed for SAFETY-02/30**, on a string with the same persistence. |
| **B7** | `main.py:2454` | `self.site_max_w` / `self.target` | the clamp action-log line | **NO** — `was clamped to` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B8** | `main.py:3386` | `clamp_wd.engagements` / `.episodes` | status page, `engaged N time(s) in M episode(s)` | **NO** — `time(s) in` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B9–B11** | `main.py:3169` (three pairs) | `p1.net_w` / `.samples` / `.parse_errors` | status page, the P1 row | **NO** — `P1 meter (` is in no `test_*.py`. |
| **B12** | `arbiter.py:264` | `c.source` / `c.actuator` | `scope_errors`, the arbiter's mis-routing refusal | **ROUND 4: MEASURED, THEN CLOSED.** Round 3 left it at source level; the transposition is **0 bytes**, `arbiter.py` `fdb4ed0520eeb721` → `9111f627ef639ecc`, and it was **21/21 green**. Now red in `test_arbiter.py` on 2 checks. Round 3's reasoning was right: `test_arbiter.py:452` says it *"names the source and the actuator it does not belong on"* and then asserts `"peak" in r_mis.scope_errors[0]`. Under the swap the sentence becomes `"inverter-b: a SITE claim filed on unit 'peak'"` — and `"peak" in …` is **still true**. A claim wider than its assertion, which is habit 14's own shape. |
| **B13** | `validate.py:723` | `meter_phases` / `meter_max_age_s` | the startup refusal | **NO** for the ordered pair. |
| **B14** | `validate.py:1211` | `arbitrage_soc_floor` / `arbitrage_soc_ceiling` | the startup refusal | **NO** for the ordered pair. |
| **B15** | `watchdog.py:667` | `cfg.min_w` / `cfg.hold_s` | the `SIGN_DISAGREEMENT` sentence's `(limits: both over 300 W, held over 180 s)` clause | **YES**, and it is worth naming because it shows the habit works. `test_watchdog.py`'s SAFETY-30 section asserts the site instance's **whole sentence with `==` against a literal**, the `(limits: …)` clause included. Full-string equality is habit 14 taken to its limit. |
| B16 | `main.py:237` | `i.name` / `i.max_w` | the roster log line | **not real** — a `str` beside a `:.0f` format. The same over-report as A5–A6: a mixed-type transposition raises rather than lying. |
| **B17** | `arbitrage.py:377` | `v.spread_eur_kwh` / `v.required_spread_eur_kwh` | the DISCHARGE decision's `reason` | **ROUND 4, NEW, and MEASURED: 0 bytes, 21/21 green.** Not visible to round 3 at all — the sentence is handed to a constructor as `reason=`, and the sink walker scored only *assignments*. The row then reads *"0.0400 above the cheapest and clear of the 0.1200 this cycle had to cover"* with the two swapped: a trade justified by a spread it did not clear. |
| **B18** | `arbitrage.py:393` | same pair, CHARGE branch | the CHARGE decision's `reason` | **ROUND 4, NEW, MEASURED: 0 bytes, 21/21 green.** |
| **B19** | `main.py:2652` | `g.reason` / `g.soc_floor_reason` | the `goodwe_peak_soc_floor` notification body | **ROUND 4, NEW, MEASURED: 0 bytes, 21/21 green.** The alarm then opens with the *reason the floor bound* and closes with the *guard's own conclusion*, i.e. both halves of a two-part explanation in the wrong order, in the one message SAFETY-24/25 exist to send. |
| B20–B22 | `main.py:2558`, `main.py:2652` (two more pairs) | `g.reason` / `g.ceiling_w`, `g.ceiling_w` / `g.soc_floor_reason` | the same two notifications | **new in round 4, NOT measured** — mixed types (`str` beside `:.0f`), the same over-report class as B16. |
**⚠️ Six of these twenty-two were invisible to round 3, and the reason is one
line of the sink classifier.** It scored a sentence a MESSAGE when it was
appended, logged, raised, or assigned to a `reason`-shaped **name**. This
codebase mostly builds operator sentences as `Decision(…, reason=f"…")` and
`out.append({"text": f"…"})` — a **keyword argument** and a **dict key**, which
that walker stepped straight past. Both are message sinks now.
### 7d. What this enumeration does NOT close, with sizes
* **A3 is a measured, open survivor.** `dev_min`/`dev_max` transposed in
`rail_unreachable()`'s NOT COVERED row: **0 bytes, 21/21 green.** It is
disclosed here rather than fixed, because closing it wants a `test_freeze.py`
or status-page fixture with a device whose two bounds are **asymmetric** —
every fixture in the repository uses `±d` — and that is a different file's
card. It is a **status-page row**, not a latching alarm.
* **B1 is a second measured, open survivor.** `inv.dev_min` and `inv.dev_max`
transposed in `main.py:3231`'s status row: **0 bytes**, fingerprint
`61aa413f…` → `ac36a97b…`, **21/21 green**. The page then tells the operator
the device accepts `130…−120 W`. Same disposition as A3: **A3 is the row the
freeze detector prints when the rail is UNREACHABLE, B1 the clause the ARMED
row prints when the device is what set the rail** — the two rows in which that
detector ever names a device range, and neither one's operand order is
asserted anywhere.
* **Thirteen further census-B sites are unpinned and UNMEASURED.** B2–B14 above
are determined at the **source level** — the distinguishing literal appears in
no `test_*.py`, or the check that exists asserts a substring wider than its
own claim — and were **not** mutated. That is a weaker statement than A1–A4
and B1, and is written down as one.
* **B12 is a check whose CLAIM is wider than its ASSERTION**, which is habit
14's own shape one module over. `test_arbiter.py:452` says
`scope_violations` *"names the source and the actuator it does not belong
on"* and then asserts `"peak" in r_mis.scope_errors[0]`. Swap `c.source` and
`c.actuator` in `arbiter.py:264` and the sentence becomes
*"inverter-b: a SITE claim filed on unit 'peak'"* — and the substring is still
found. Source-level, not mutated, and not fixed here.
* **B6 is the closest thing to a repeat.** SAFETY-31's `circ_reason` is
persisted and re-read after a restart, exactly like `sign_reason`, and its
two limits are graded by a bare `"CIRCULATING_POWER" in reason`. This card
does not fix it; §6a already declines to touch `circ_wd`, and this is the
precise shape of what that declining costs.
* **The instrument's own blind spots** are printed by the instrument, every
run: semantic symmetry it cannot spell (it under-reports), census B pairs
that are the same *kind* but not the same *shape*, `%s`-style logging and
non-f-string payloads, anything outside `app/`, and the one way it
**over-reports** — it erases the sentence, so a swap that would make the
formatting itself raise is scored as changing no decision (A5–A6 above).
### 7e. Census C — the sentence an object returns about itself (round 4)
**Why there is a third census.** A and B between them covered **one syntactic
sink**. Everything either of them reported was a sentence that is appended,
assigned, or logged; **none was returned**. Census A's RETURN bucket only ever
held a callee formatting its own **parameters**, so a method formatting its own
**attributes** and handing the string back fell between them — and that is the
whole `describe()` / `explain()` / reason-builder family, which is where the
operator sentences in this codebase actually live.
**The test** is census B's — one f-string, two interpolations **one leaf apart**
— run over the RETURN sink, plus one thing B never needed: **a returned string
is not yet a message.** `store.unit_key()` and `mqtt.unit_state_key()` return
f-strings too, and swapping there renames a store key and an MQTT topic, which
every ordinary check can see (MAINT-05). So the sink of a returned sentence is
**resolved through its call sites**: it is in this family only when some caller
in `app/` hands it to an operator. That resolution matches on the **bare method
name**, which over-collects — at least four unrelated classes have an
`explain()` — so every verdict is printed **with the sites that produced it**,
and a MESSAGE verdict is a prompt to read them, not a proof.
The scan reports **53 returned pairs, 39 reaching an operator, 16 of those
sharing a format spec** (two values rendered alike, so a transposition is silent
rather than visibly broken). It **rediscovered both members this round was sent
to fix without being told where to look**, which is the only reason to trust the
rest of the list.
| # | site | pair | reaches an operator as | Δ bytes | verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| **C6** | `clamp.py:253` `ClampResult.describe()` | `requested_w` / `applied_w` | §15 action log (`main.py:1366`) **and** the ClampWatchdog notification reason (`main.py:2452`) | **0** | **was a SURVIVOR at 21/21 — now RED**, `test_clamp.py` part 6d, 4 checks |
| **C7** | `peakguard.py:493` `PeakDecision.explain()` | `projected_w` / `ceiling_w` | status row `main.py:3313`; action log `main.py:1951` on the release edge | **0** | **was a SURVIVOR at 21/21 — now RED**, `test_peakguard.py` part 13, 3 checks |
| C1 | `allocator.py:154` `UnitPlan.explain()` | `self.span` / `self.why` | the arbiter/allocator log line | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** |
| C2 | `allocator.py:160` | `self.span` / `self.why` | the ENVELOPE VIOLATED line | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** |
| C3 | `allocator.py:162` | `self.span` / `self.why` | the ordinary in-envelope line | **0** | **RED** — `test_alloc.py` already asserts that whole literal. The one member of this census the suite could already see, and it says the habit works. |
| C4a | `arbiter.py:344` `UnitBounds.explain()` | `self.lo` / `self.hi` | `CONTRADICTION within the unit (device lo=… > peak hi=…)` | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** |
| C4b | `arbiter.py:344` | `self.lo_src` / `self.hi_src` | the same sentence, the two SOURCE names | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** |
| C5 | `arbiter.py:392` `Resolution.explain()` | `self.winner` / `self.bound_by` | `main.py:2236`'s `ARBITER:` action-log row and `self.reason` at `main.py:2329` | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** — the winner and the limiter swap names, on the line §10.1 exists to make legible |
| C8 | `tariff.py:279` `PeakReading.explain()` | `self.month` / `self.detail` | the PEAK UNREADABLE row | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** |
| C9 | `tariff.py:528` `Projection.explain()` | `self.projected_w` / `self.elapsed_s` | the projection line | **0** | **SURVIVOR, 21/21 green** — watts printed as seconds and seconds as watts, both `:.0f` |
**Not in the family, and the scan says why rather than dropping them silently:**
`inverter.py:338` `__repr__()` and `static_tariff.py:378` `words` are reported
**UNRESOLVED — no call site inside `app/`** (a `__repr__` is called by the
interpreter, not by a name the scan can match); `price_forecast.py:421/428` and
`tariff.py:214` `month_key()` resolve to **OTHER** — `month_key` is a **store
key**, which is MAINT-05's case and a swap there is behaviour every check sees.
### 7f. Round 4's mutation ledger
Same protocol as §4: a fresh full-repo copy per mutation, `:ro`, bytecode
purged **and the purge count printed** before the edit, the edited file
**re-read from disk**, both sides' length and sha256 printed, and the full
**21-file** suite via `tools/mutation_run.sh`. Every row is a pure
transposition, so **every Δ is 0 bytes** — verified, not assumed: `len(old) ==
len(new)` is asserted before the write and `len(after) == len(before)` after it.
**⚠️ And every row was also required to change the ANSWER.** A byte delta says
the file moved; it does not say the sentence did. Each mutated tree is rendered
through a scratch probe that evaluates the shipped f-string with **distinct
operands** and diffs it against the same render of the clean tree. **The first
cut of that probe numbered the operands by ORDER OF APPEARANCE** — so after a
transposition the other leaf took the same number and all thirteen diffs came
back **empty**, which reads exactly like "the edit is inert". Keying the value
to the **name** fixed it. That is the same defect as everything else in this
card, in the instrument this time: a measurement comparing the swap against
itself.
| mutation | file, before → after (sha256, 16) | Δ | verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| C1 `allocator.py:154` span↔why | `10c1b26ed0099654` → `ac0c174de1ec28ad` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| C2 `allocator.py:160` span↔why | `10c1b26ed0099654` → `9b10730f4659befd` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| C3 `allocator.py:162` span↔why | `10c1b26ed0099654` → `07097bf5da31f0c6` | 0 | **RED** — `test_alloc.py` |
| C4a `arbiter.py:344` lo↔hi | `fdb4ed0520eeb721` → `009820de7ef0eff0` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| C4b `arbiter.py:344` lo_src↔hi_src | `fdb4ed0520eeb721` → `04cb8cf69dfc7432` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| C5 `arbiter.py:392` winner↔bound_by | `fdb4ed0520eeb721` → `9238c3db920da8ad` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| **C6** `clamp.py:253` requested↔applied | `0153133741497fa5` → `47e4e371043e3201` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21 before — RED after**, `test_clamp.py`, 4 checks |
| **C7** `peakguard.py:493` projected↔ceiling | `d95df61a51716c26` → `2d2ee3d0bcd51251` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21 before — RED after**, `test_peakguard.py`, 3 checks |
| C8 `tariff.py:279` month↔detail | `82790523dd5227c9` → `4b2147ca17a28425` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| C9 `tariff.py:528` projected↔elapsed | `82790523dd5227c9` → `517e9148d26a243a` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| B17 `arbitrage.py:377` spread↔required | `67fbf949b2938349` → `cddd8045bdeb5e29` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| B18 `arbitrage.py:393` spread↔required | `67fbf949b2938349` → `04a4f3ad3d255de1` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| B19 `main.py:2652` reason↔soc_floor_reason | `61aa413fb890433e` → `bbcbb28f476a98d0` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21** |
| **B12** `arbiter.py:264` source↔actuator | `fdb4ed0520eeb721` → `9111f627ef639ecc` | 0 | **SURVIVED 21/21 before — RED after**, `test_arbiter.py`, 2 checks |
**14 measured, 12 survived the full suite before this round's checks, 1 was
already caught, 3 are caught now.** The tree these were taken on is
`SAFETY-38` @ `357cb4f` rebased on `release/1.0` @ `9e42cec`; `app/main.py` is
234 542 bytes.
### 7g. What round 4 does NOT close, with sizes
* **Eleven measured zero-byte survivors are left open** — C1, C2, C4a, C4b, C5,
C8, C9, B17, B18, B19 and the three already open from round 3 (A3, B1, and the
B2–B11/B13–B14 source-level set). Each is a sentence an operator reads and
none is a control decision. They are disclosed with their measurement rather
than pinned because pinning each one wants a fixture in the file that owns the
module — `test_alloc.py`, `test_arbiter.py`, `test_tariff.py`,
`test_arbitrage.py` — and this card has now spent four rounds inside
`test_watchdog.py`'s subject. **An enumerated list with honest gaps beats a
fifth round finding a fifth instance**; what would NOT be honest is a fifth
round finding one that is **not on this list**.
* **`main.py:1951`, the action-log surface of the peak-guard idle line,** is
unpinned. The status row off the same `explain()` is pinned; the second call
site is not, and §4c is the card about exactly that costing a round.
* **The largest remaining hole is not in any census: `%s`-style lazy logging.**
`_LOG.error("… %s … %s", a, b)` puts the two operands in *arguments*, not in
an f-string, so nothing here looks at them and the transposition is the same
zero-byte edit. The tool now says so first in its NOT-SCANNED list, **with
the size measured rather than asserted: 31 such calls across 8 modules in
`app/`, each one listed**.
* **The tool's own blind-spot list was the round-4 blocker and is now two
lists.** "What this scans, and what it does not" enumerates its message sinks
from the constants themselves and then names, in order, what it never looks at:
`%s`-style logging, `.format()`/`%`/`+`/`.join()` sentences, a sentence that
leaves through a dict or dataclass and is rendered elsewhere, `yield`ed
sentences, attributes outside the `reason`-shaped set, and everything outside
`app/`. "What it can see but gets wrong" keeps the five gaps round 3 printed,
with the over-report gap now backed by a **printed format-spec column** so a
reader can tell a silent same-typed transposition from a noisy mixed-type one.