8000 docs: record derived claim-status evidence by Mnehmos · Pull Request #40 · Mnehmos/MathOS · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content

docs: record derived claim-status evidence - #40

Merged
Mnehmos merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/record-derived-status-evidence
Jul 21, 2026
Merged

docs: record derived claim-status evidence#40
Mnehmos merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/record-derived-status-evidence

Conversation

@Mnehmos
@Mnehmos Mnehmos commented Jul 21, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • replace issue Phase 3: derive exact claim research status from current fidelity and formal authority #38 candidate/pending language with the exact merged-tree result
  • record PR, CI, protected publication, archive, closure, receipt, status, and attestation identities
  • check only the release criterion now proven: truth status is derived and cannot be directly mutated
  • leave Pilot A, protected refutation, replay, pedagogy, portability, and 1.0 release criteria open

Validation

  • git diff --check
  • independent audit of protected run 29856660579 / artifact 8505590232
  • post-merge CI run 29856660451: all five required jobs passed

Tracks #38. The issue should close only after this ledger PR lands and its protected-main run is verified.

@coderabbitai
coderabbitai Bot commented Jul 21, 2026 •
edited
Loading
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Review limit reached

@Mnehmos, you've reached your PR review limit, so we couldn't start this review.

Next review available in: 22 minutes

Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available.
You're only billed for reviews past your plan's rate limits ($0.25/file).

How can I continue?

After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews.

How do review limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability.

For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window.

Please refer docs for additional details.

Review details
⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 83453ca9-d7db-433f-8080-97691709e978

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 8e65549 and 225474d.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • docs/implementation/RELEASE_CHECKLIST.md
  • docs/implementation/STATUS.md
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch docs/record-derived-status-evidence

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.

@Mnehmos
Mnehmos marked this pull request as ready for review July 21, 2026 18:37
@Mnehmos Mnehmos mentioned this pull request Jul 21, 2026
Closed
22 tasks done
@Mnehmos
Mnehmos merged commit f79d4bf into main Jul 21, 2026
6 checks passed
@Mnehmos
Mnehmos deleted the docs/record-derived-status-evidence branch July 21, 2026 18:40
@Mnehmos Mnehmos mentioned this pull request Jul 21, 2026
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant

@Mnehmos
0