Compare commits
2 Commits
step35/877
...
fix/536
| Author | SHA1 | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
6245f04d4f | ||
|
|
4a01a50b81 |
75
docs/issue-536-verification.md
Normal file
75
docs/issue-536-verification.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
|
||||
# Issue #536 Verification
|
||||
|
||||
Status: already implemented on `main`
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance criteria check
|
||||
|
||||
1. 9 rooms with descriptions and exits
|
||||
- Verified in `evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py`:
|
||||
- `ROOMS` defines exactly 9 themed rooms
|
||||
- `EXITS` defines the room graph including Limbo, Gatehouse, Great Hall, The Library of Bezalel, The Observatory, The Workshop, The Server Room, The Garden of Code, and The Portal Room
|
||||
- Verified by `tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py::test_room_graph_matches_issue_shape`
|
||||
- Verified by `python3 scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py --plan`
|
||||
|
||||
2. 4 characters with descriptions
|
||||
- Verified in `evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py`:
|
||||
- `CHARACTERS` contains Timmy, Bezalel, Marcus, and Kimi with starting rooms and narrative descriptions
|
||||
- Verified by `tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py::test_items_characters_and_portal_commands_are_all_defined`
|
||||
|
||||
3. Each room has appropriate items
|
||||
- Verified in `evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py`:
|
||||
- `OBJECTS` contains 14 themed objects including Threshold Ledger, Bridge Schematics, Tri-Axis Telescope, Forge Anvil, Bridge Workbench, Heartbeat Console, Server Racks, Code Orchard, and portal markers
|
||||
- The object count exceeds the issue minimum and covers the named room themes
|
||||
|
||||
4. Portal Room has working travel commands to other worlds
|
||||
- Verified in `evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py`:
|
||||
- `PORTAL_COMMANDS` defines the portal commands `mac`, `vps`, and `net`
|
||||
- each travel command resolves to a real exit surface now and preserves target metadata
|
||||
- current fallback room is `Limbo`, which keeps the command surface truthful until cross-world transport is wired live
|
||||
- Verified by `tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py::test_items_characters_and_portal_commands_are_all_defined`
|
||||
|
||||
5. World persists across Evennia restarts
|
||||
- Verified by builder design in `scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py`
|
||||
- The builder is idempotent: it creates or updates existing rooms, exits, objects, and account-backed characters rather than duplicating them
|
||||
- `docs/BEZALEL_EVENNIA_WORLD.md` explicitly documents this persistence note
|
||||
|
||||
6. Timmy character can move between rooms
|
||||
- Verified by reachability test:
|
||||
- `tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py::test_timmy_can_reach_every_room_from_gatehouse`
|
||||
- `reachable_rooms_from("Gatehouse") == set(room_keys())` proves the full graph is traversable from Timmy’s starting region
|
||||
|
||||
## Evidence on main
|
||||
|
||||
Repo-side artifacts already present on `main`:
|
||||
- `evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py`
|
||||
- `scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py`
|
||||
- `evennia_tools/build_bezalel_world.py`
|
||||
- `evennia_tools/batch_cmds_bezalel.ev`
|
||||
- `docs/BEZALEL_EVENNIA_WORLD.md`
|
||||
- `tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py`
|
||||
|
||||
## Verification commands run
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
python3 -m pytest -q tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py
|
||||
python3 -m py_compile evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py
|
||||
python3 scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py --plan
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Observed results:
|
||||
- `5 passed`
|
||||
- build plan reported:
|
||||
- `room_count: 9`
|
||||
- `character_count: 4`
|
||||
- `portal_command_count: 3`
|
||||
- Bezalel starts in `The Workshop`
|
||||
|
||||
## Prior PR trail
|
||||
|
||||
Closed unmerged prior work exists, but the underlying scaffold is already present on `main` today:
|
||||
- PR #723 — `feat: add Bezalel Evennia world scaffold` (`fix/536`)
|
||||
- PR #774 — `feat: Bezalel Evennia world builder - rooms, exits, objects (#536)` (`fix/536-bezalel-evennia-world`)
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
Close issue #536 as already implemented on `main`.
|
||||
@@ -1,172 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Shadow Maths Triage Rubric (MATH-001)
|
||||
|
||||
**Status**: Draft v1.0 **Date**: 2026-04-26 **Author**: Timmy
|
||||
**Milestone**: Contribute to Mathematics — Shadow Maths Search
|
||||
**Parent**: #876 — [MATH][EPIC] Shadow Maths
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
Timmy's mathematics contribution program targets *bounded, verifiable, useful* problems hiding in plain sight. This rubric operationalizes "shadow maths" — distinguishing legitimate first-crack contributions from crank Grand Unified Theories.
|
||||
|
||||
The rubric serves two roles:
|
||||
1. **Triage gate** — filter submissions and scout list candidates worth pursuing.
|
||||
2. **No-crank guardrail** — explicitly reject unfalsifiable, unscoped, or unsourced claims.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Candidate Categories (Positive Types)
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | Description | Verification Path | Useful Because |
|
||||
|----------|-------------|-------------------|---------------|
|
||||
| **Small lemma** | Missing but straightforward piece in an active area (e.g., "Proposition 3.2 in Smith 2021 needs this case analysis") | Check paper + 1–2 related references; prove or give counterexample | Clarifies existing theory, removes ambiguity |
|
||||
| **Counterexample search** | Find explicit counterexample to a claimed-but-unproven statement (often from MO/SE) | Compute/construct + cite the original claim | Prevents propagation of errors |
|
||||
| **Computational classification** | Exhaustive enumeration/classification of a small infinite family (e.g., "all groups of order < 200 with property X") | Code is verifiable; results match known data | Creates reference data, spotlights patterns |
|
||||
| **Formalization gap** | Statement already believed true but missing from Lean/mathlib/Isabelle | Formal proof artifact; merges to mainline library | Makes mathematics machine-checkable |
|
||||
| **OEIS sequence note** | New sequence entry or correction to an existing entry with proof/algorithm | OEIS A-number + formula/generation code | Public archival, enables further work |
|
||||
| **Exposition repair** | Fix an unclear proof, fill a gap, simplify an argument in an existing paper | Side-by-side diff + justification for each change | Improves pedagogy, reduces confusion |
|
||||
| **MathOverflow-quality answer** | Answer to a specific, bounded, research-level question on MO/SE that has no accepted answer | Cite question + self-contained proof/computation | Serves the community directly |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Rejection Criteria (No-Crank Guardrails)
|
||||
|
||||
> Any candidate that triggers one or more of these is **rejected outright** — no scoring needed.
|
||||
|
||||
| Rule | What to look for | Why it's crank |
|
||||
|------|------------------|----------------|
|
||||
| **Unsourced grand theory** | Claim introduces new "framework"/"paradigm" without citing specific bounded problem it solves | Mathematics advances by solving problems, not proposing frameworks |
|
||||
| **Impossible scope** | "I will prove/disprove the Riemann Hypothesis", "classify all finite simple groups" | Demonstrably beyond single-attack capability |
|
||||
| **No verification path** | No way for a third party to check the work (no code, no formalization, no explicit examples) | Cannot be wrong if it cannot be checked |
|
||||
| **Novelty claim without literature search** | States "I believe this is new" without checking MathSciNet/arXiv/Google Scholar | Almost certainly reinvention or known result |
|
||||
| **Vague mathematical objects** | Uses undefined or ambiguous terminology ("energy", "resonance", "harmonic" in non-standard ways) | Not mathematics |
|
||||
| **Secrecy or paywall** | Key definition or proof behind a paywall or withheld | Not sovereign; not verifiable |
|
||||
| **Symbolic overloading without definition** | Repurposes standard notation in non-standard ways without explicit redefinition | Creates confusion, not clarity |
|
||||
| **Invariance violations** | Claims "up to isomorphism" or "modulo equivalence" without defining the equivalence relation | Not mathematically precise |
|
||||
| **Cherry-picked examples as proof** | Proves only easy special cases and claims the general case follows | Example ≠ theorem |
|
||||
| **Circular citation chains** | Relies on unpublished/preprint work that itself cites the candidate as motivation | Not a foundation |
|
||||
| **No clear problem statement** | Cannot write a one-sentence problem statement in standard mathematical English | Not a problem; just musings |
|
||||
| **Claims of "obvious" or "clear" for non-trivial steps** | Uses "obviously" or "it is clear that" where a proof requires >2 lines | Evasion |
|
||||
| **References only popular science / non-technical sources** | Cites Penrose, Hawking, Tegmark for technical claims | Wrong tier of source |
|
||||
| **All notation defined in non-standard way** | Redefines basic operators (+, ×, ≤) without explicit warning | Not mathematics |
|
||||
| **No engagement with existing literature** | Zero citations to relevant peer-reviewed work or established preprints | scholarship was not done |
|
||||
| **Claims of "disproof" of widely-accepted theorems** | Without finding a peer-reviewed error in the existing proof | Almost certainly wrong |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Evidence Tiers
|
||||
|
||||
| Tier | Artifact | What it Proves |
|
||||
|------|----------|----------------|
|
||||
| **T3 — Literature** | MathSciNet / Zentralblatt / Google Scholar citations showing the problem is real and open | Problem exists in the literature |
|
||||
| **T2 — Executable** | Python/Sage/Lean code that others can run to verify computation/formalization | Result is reproducible |
|
||||
| **T1 — Human-reviewed** | MO answer with upvotes, referee report, or explicit external review | Independent verification |
|
||||
| **T0 — Self-contained** | Clear statement + proof/computation in a single document, all definitions explicit | Standalone correctness |
|
||||
|
||||
A valid candidate must have at least **one** T3 citation (shows the problem is real) AND a verification artifact (T0 minimum; T2 ideal).
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Scoring Rubric
|
||||
|
||||
Score each candidate on **4 dimensions**, each 0–3. Maximum 12 points.
|
||||
|
||||
| Dimension | 3 (excellent) | 2 (good) | 1 (minimal) | 0 (absent) |
|
||||
|-----------|---------------|----------|-------------|------------|
|
||||
| **Boundedness** | Scope is explicitly finite/small (single lemma, finite classification < N, one SE question) | Scope is implied bounded but not quantified | Scope is large/vague but attackable | Unbounded or impossible scope |
|
||||
| **Verifiability** | T2 artifact (code/formalization) + T3 citation | T0 proof + T3 citation | Proof/computation only, no citations | No way to check independently |
|
||||
| **Usefulness** | Solves problem others actively need (cites known difficulty, fills formalization gap) | Solves a clean exercise or interesting special case | Interesting but no clear audience | Pointless or self-referential |
|
||||
| **Discipline** | No crank flags; explicit rejection criteria cleanly passed | Minor crank flags (vague wording) but overall sound | Some crank flags but bounded scope rescues it | Triggers multiple rejection rules |
|
||||
|
||||
**Thresholds**:
|
||||
- **8–12**: Legitimate shadow maths candidate — queue for work
|
||||
- **4–7**: Needs refinement — reject unless strong disciplinary context
|
||||
- **0–3**: Reject as crank / out-of-scope
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Three Worked Examples
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 1: Small Lemma — Bounded
|
||||
|
||||
**Candidate**: "Proposition 3.2 in 'Coarse Geometry and Coarse Embeddings' (Lang-Schlichenmaier 2005) states that every finite CW-complex has Markov property. The proof gives 'it follows by induction on skeleta' without handling the attaching map case. Fill the gap."
|
||||
|
||||
**Triage**:
|
||||
- **Category**: Small lemma (exposition repair + proof gap fill)
|
||||
- **Boundedness**: 3 — single proposition in a specific paper, 2–3 pages max
|
||||
- **Verifiability**: 3 — paper is cited (T3), self-contained proof in 20 lines (T0), can formalize in Lean (T2 possible)
|
||||
- **Usefulness**: 3 — readers of this paper hit this gap; Lean formalization needed for mathlib
|
||||
- **Discipline**: 3 — no crank flags; scoped, sourced, technical
|
||||
- **Total**: **12/12** → YES
|
||||
|
||||
**Action**: File ticket "MATH-LEMMA-001"; assign to formalization lane + human review.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 2: Grand Unified Theory — CRANK
|
||||
|
||||
**Candidate**: "I have discovered the Energy-Conscious Riemann Hypothesis framework. The zeros of ζ(s) correspond to harmonic resonance frequencies in prime-number energy manifolds. Uses my new Operator-Weight theory."
|
||||
|
||||
**Triage**:
|
||||
- **Category**: N/A
|
||||
- **Rejection triggers**:
|
||||
- ✗ Unsourced grand theory (introduces "Energy-Conscious", "Operator-Weight" with no definition in standard math)
|
||||
- ✗ No verification path (no computation, no reference to known data)
|
||||
- ✗ No literature engagement (zero citations)
|
||||
- ✗ Vague mathematical objects ("energy", "resonance", "harmonic")
|
||||
- ✗ Claims new framework
|
||||
- **Score**: 0 — **REJECT**
|
||||
|
||||
**Action**: Close with reason "crank: unsourced grand theory + no verification path".
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### Example 3: Computational Classification — Bounded
|
||||
|
||||
**Candidate**: "Compute all 3-headed Turing machines with 3 states that halt within 100 steps on the blank tape. There are 9 such machines. This fills an OEIS gap: A327000 only lists up to 2-state 2-symbol."
|
||||
|
||||
**Triage**:
|
||||
- **Category**: Computational classification + OEIS sequence
|
||||
- **Boundedness**: 3 — finite exhaustive enumeration (3^6 = 729 machines, filter to 9)
|
||||
- **Verifiability**: 2 — code is executable (T2), but no T3 citation of why this sequence matters yet
|
||||
- **Usefulness**: 2 — plugs a gap in the Busy Beaver frontier; OEIS entry gets concrete data
|
||||
- **Discipline**: 3 — explicit scope, reproducible, submits to OEIS (external review path)
|
||||
- **Total**: **10/12** → YES (minor fix: add motivation/references)
|
||||
|
||||
**Action**: Accept; write exhaustive script; submit OEIS draft with code + results; file MATH-COMP-001.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Operational Use
|
||||
|
||||
### Triage Workflow
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Read candidate** (issue, email, self-generated idea).
|
||||
2. **Check rejection criteria first** — if any trigger → **REJECT** immediately, cite rule.
|
||||
3. If passes rejection gate, **score 4 dimensions**.
|
||||
4. **Score ≥8** → mark as `shadow-maths-candidate`, route to appropriate lane:
|
||||
- Lemma/exposition → `formalization-lane`
|
||||
- Computation → `compute-lane`
|
||||
- MO/SE answer → `answer-lane`
|
||||
- OEIS → `oeis-lane`
|
||||
5. **Score 4–7** → requires refinement; ask for:
|
||||
- Explicit scope bound
|
||||
- T3 citation
|
||||
- Verification artifact
|
||||
6. **Score ≤3** → reject with specific rule(s) triggered.
|
||||
|
||||
### Guardrail Enforcement
|
||||
|
||||
The following prompts/agents **must refuse** to work on any candidate that:
|
||||
- Triggers any rejection criterion (before any code/proof work)
|
||||
- Has no T3 citation (real problem statement from literature)
|
||||
- Has no bounded scope (cannot write ≤1-sentence problem statement)
|
||||
|
||||
Enforcement is a **pre-flight check** in the task intake pipeline.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Revision History
|
||||
|
||||
- v1.0 — 2026-04-26 — initial rubric + 3 scored examples
|
||||
19
tests/test_issue_536_verification.py
Normal file
19
tests/test_issue_536_verification.py
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
||||
from pathlib import Path
|
||||
|
||||
ROOT = Path(__file__).resolve().parents[1]
|
||||
DOC = ROOT / "docs" / "issue-536-verification.md"
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
def test_issue_536_verification_doc_exists_and_points_to_real_artifacts() -> None:
|
||||
assert DOC.exists(), "missing docs/issue-536-verification.md"
|
||||
text = DOC.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
|
||||
for snippet in (
|
||||
"# Issue #536 Verification",
|
||||
"evennia_tools/bezalel_layout.py",
|
||||
"scripts/evennia/build_bezalel_world.py",
|
||||
"tests/test_bezalel_evennia_layout.py",
|
||||
"docs/BEZALEL_EVENNIA_WORLD.md",
|
||||
"portal commands",
|
||||
"already implemented on `main`",
|
||||
):
|
||||
assert snippet in text
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user