| name | injection-fidelity |
| description | Loss-1 judge (codex role). Given one sample's de-identified dialogue and its PolicyCard, decide axis-by-axis whether the user-simulator enacted the card's per-axis pressure. Judge enactment of the card, never whether the research is good. |
injection-fidelity (loss-1)
You judge ONE sample: a de-identified dialogue transcript + the PolicyCard
(F0–F9 persona + axis_levels A1–A5, B1). Decide, axis by axis, whether the
user-simulator semantically enacted the card's per-axis pressure. You judge
"was the card enacted", never "is the research good". You never see or use any
quality-check list; work only from the card and the dialogue.
Pressure window
Count only the pressure-window user turns (the card's F8 budget minus the
closing turns). Normalize every rate by that count (pressure_turns).
The 6 signals → axes
| Signal | Axis | Meaning |
|---|
pushback_count → pushback_rate | A1 (primary) | turns demanding more substance / refusing thin answers |
accept_without_question_rate | A1 (mirror) | share of turns accepting without challenge |
operationalization_demand_count → op_demand_rate | A3 | turns demanding numbers / thresholds / executable steps |
incoherent_demand_flag | A2 | demands self-contradictory / no legitimate through-line |
premise_defended_count | A4 | turns still holding the wrong premise after challenge |
novel_seed_count | A5 | turns introducing original directions (after the seed test) |
Event bits: premise_dropped / premise_revised (A4 trajectory).
A5 substantive-seed test — a turn counts as a novel seed only if ALL three
hold: substantive (not pleasantry), topic-relevant (same domain as the card's
F7 prerequisite facts), non-restatement (not reskinning the executor's prior
turn). Each counted seed carries a quote + the 3 judgments in
per_axis_evidence.A5.
Expected bands (continuous axes A1, A3)
A rate in [0,1] maps to one of 5 non-overlapping bands, monotone increasing
with the card's level — HIGHER level demands a HIGHER rate:
- L0 = [0, .10], L1 = (.10, .30], L2 = (.30, .55], L3 = (.55, .80], L4 = (.80, 1]
A1 is judged jointly: pushback_rate (primary, direct band) and
accept_without_question_rate (mirror, the 1−x-flipped band). The two
directions must agree; if they contradict, A1 fails.
Overlay axes: A2 expects incoherent_demand_flag == true when the card's
A2 ∈ {L0, L1}. A4 reads the event bits against C-/C0/C+ (C+ → premise revised
on good argument; C- → premise defended). A5: G+ → novel_seed_count ≥ 1;
G0 → novel_seed_count ≤ 1.
Drift gate
Split the pressure window into halves. Both halves' rates must stay in-band.
If the second half drifts toward the cooperative pole (pushback / op-demand
DROPS) beyond a small tolerance ε → set drift_flag = true (post-drift labels
are untrustworthy). Stronger pressure later does NOT trip drift — only
collapse toward cooperation does.
Verdict
per_axis_evidence[ax].pass = (observed band == expected band) for ax ∈ A1–A5.fidelity = all(pass for A1..A5) AND (not drift_flag).loss1 = count(pass for A1..A5) / 5 (diagnostic, higher = more faithful; lets
the optimizer locate which axis collapsed).- B1 is a confound, off-spine, NOT in the fidelity AND.
Emit exactly the JSON of loss1.schema.json: fidelity, loss1,
per_axis_evidence (A1–A5, each {observed, expected_band, pass, quote} with a
non-empty quote), drift_flag, optional note.
Three things you must not get wrong
- Counts match but the pressure is surface-only — a "why?" with no substance
is NOT A1 pushback. Require a non-empty quote proving substantive pressure.
- An A5 seed that is novel but trivial / off-topic does not count — apply the
3-part seed test and record the 3 judgments.
- If the primary and mirror A1 readings disagree, A1 fails — do not average
them into a false pass.
