← all meta proposals

Implement E: commodity-wedge shadow check before first argument move (five binary axes)

filter rejected GATE reversible: simple 6h proposed 19 May 2026
What is the proposed change?
Add commodityWedgeShadowCheck(hypothesisId) in argument.js alongside the describability shadow check, also gated on argument_moves_count===0. Single Gemini Flash call evaluating five binary axes: (1) incumbent_already_owns_workflow — an existing SaaS product (named) already covers this workflow for the ICP; (2) requires_deep_system_integration — first revenue requires CRM/ERP/procurement-grade API credentials from the buyer; (3) deliverable_is_dashboard_or_taxonomy — the product output is a report, classification, or analytics view rather than an outcome-linked action with external ground truth; (4) no_urgency_event_named — no compliance failure, quantified OPEX waste, or direct revenue leakage is named as the trigger in the hypothesis; (5) no_owned_data_advantage — the product would produce no cross-customer compounding dataset that a clone starting later could not replicate within 6 months. commodity_wedge_recommendation=true if ≥4 axes are true. Log to meta_engine/data/shadow_gate_verdicts/commodity-YYYY-MM-DD.jsonl. Expose as additional columns on the existing /commander/<token>/shadow_verdicts route. No kill behavior.
Target files
hypothesis_engine/moves/argument.js meta_engine/data/shadow_gate_verdicts/
Expected effect
The 'RevOps Objection Taxonomy Normalizer' shape (GPT-5.5-Pro Round 1: passes describability, observed-buyer, solo-inbound, yet still structurally weak on urgency and data advantage) flags commodity_wedge=true on axes 3+4+5. After 4 weeks of shadow: hypotheses where commodity_wedge_recommendation=true should show higher council kill rate than the baseline council kill rate (~55% across all council-stage hypotheses per recent traces).
Falsifier — what would prove this wrong?
Before enabling shadow collection, create a 12-item calibration set (4 commodity wedges drawn from Round 1/2 red-team-named examples, 4 ROBUST non-wedges from the S157 5/5 list, 4 ambiguous). Shadow check must flag ≥3/4 commodity wedges, 0/4 robust non-wedges, and include ≥2 concrete axis names per flag. If calibration fails on any condition, shadow collection is blocked and prompt is revised. After 4 weeks: if ≥10 shadow verdicts exist and commodity_wedge=true does not predict council kill at a higher rate than random, axes are miscalibrated.
Evidence that triggered the proposal
  • Corpus D: brain/red_team_reviews/meta_engine_s158_round2_gpt-5.5-pro.md — names 'RevOps Objection Taxonomy Normalizer' as canonical false-positive that passes all existing gates; proposes 5-axis binary structure; Surplus E ratified in brain/META_ENGINE_S158_ROUND2_SYNTHESIS.md
  • Corpus D: brain/META_ENGINE_S158_ROUND2_SYNTHESIS.md — 'Pick GPT-5.5 structure; rename axis 4 to no_urgency_event_named; include compliance failure/OPEX waste/revenue leakage as positive markers'
  • Corpus E: Recent council verdicts — hyp-2026-05-10-26fc18 killed on 'episodic-vs-recurring tension unresolved', hyp-2026-05-11-90778c 'unvalidated and likely fatal as designed'; both consistent with axes 4+5 (no urgency event, no data advantage)

Proposer self-score

The proposer scored its own draft on these axes (0-3 each) before submitting.

AxisScore
specificity3
falsifier2
solo feasible3
blast radius3
composability3
reversibility3
Disposition
Rejected by filter_score. The proposal did not meet the bar for specificity, falsifiability, or solo-feasibility.

Evaluation history

WhenMove
2026-05-19 13:18red_team_kill
2026-05-19 11:36steelman
2026-05-19 10:09meta_filter_score
2026-05-19 10:04meta_genesis