gap-computing-ledger

name	gap-computing-ledger
description	Computes desired-current state deltas, quantifies component scores, and produces a ranked gap ledger. Use when evaluating hypothesis register state to determine where the largest gaps exist between desired and current conditions.
license	Complete terms in LICENSE.txt
serves	gap-definer
domain	gap-analysis
affects	gap-ledger-state
depends-on	none
produces	scored-gap-records

Gap Ledger Computation

Compute the distance between desired state and current state for each hypothesis and proposal in the register. Produce scored, ranked gap records that drive prioritization.

---

Process

Step 1: Extract Desired and Current States [S]

For each hypothesis section (Problem, Segment, Unit Economics, Value Proposition) and each proposal section (Growth Architecture, Solution Design, GTM Plan):

1. Read the Desired State block. List every condition under "SUPPORTED means."
2. Read the Current State block. For each condition, record its fulfillment status: MET, PARTIAL, MISSING, or CONTRADICTED.
3. If a section has no Desired State block, mark the entire section as having a gap of type EVIDENCE_STRENGTH with note "no desired state defined."

Gate: states_extracted: bool -- every register section has a desired/current pair or is flagged as missing.

• Pass: Step 2.
• Fail: flag missing sections and proceed with available data.

Step 2: Score Each Gap [R]

For each condition that is not MET, compute a gap record using these scales:

Confidence Gap (0-3):

Current Confidence	Desired Confidence	Score
unvalidated	supported	3
researched	supported	2
supported but thin	supported (robust)	1
supported	supported	0

Evidence Weakness (0-3):

Evidence Profile	Score
Only T3 / assertion-heavy	3
Mostly T2	2
Mixed T1/T2 but thin	1
Enough T1 for decision	0

Pain Uncertainty (0-3):

Pain Clarity	Score
Unclear whether pain is real or acute	3
Partially clear	2
Mostly clear	1
Clear	0

Time Penalty (0-2):

Deadline Status	Score
Exceeded	2
Due or near due	1
Within deadline	0

Blast Radius Weight (1-3):

Impact If Wrong	Weight
Strategy collapses	3
One major hypothesis must change	2
Local revision only	1

Final Priority Score:

Final Priority = (Confidence Gap + Evidence Weakness + Pain Uncertainty + Time Penalty) x Blast Radius Weight

Gate: all_gaps_scored: bool -- every non-MET condition has all five component scores and a computed final priority.

• Pass: Step 3.
• Fail: identify which gap is missing a score component. Re-evaluate that component.

Step 3: Assign Gap Dimension [R]

Classify each gap into exactly one dimension:

Condition	Dimension
Hypothesis evidence is weak or missing	EVIDENCE_STRENGTH
Problem pain intensity or frequency unclear	PAIN_CLARITY
Segment identity or access unclear	SEGMENT_CLARITY
Unit economics assumptions unresolved	ECONOMIC_VIABILITY
Value proposition clauses untested	VALUE_PROP_VALIDITY
Architecture conditions unmet	ARCHITECTURE_READINESS
Solution design inadequacy	SOLUTION_ADEQUACY
GTM plan feasibility uncertain	GTM_FEASIBILITY
Two sections contradict each other	INTERNAL_CONTRADICTION
Requires governor input to resolve	GOVERNOR_DECISION_REQUIRED

Gate: all_gaps_dimensioned: bool -- every gap has exactly one dimension.

• Pass: Step 4.
• Fail: re-classify ambiguous gaps. If a gap spans two dimensions, split it into two records.

Step 4: Rank and Select Top 3 [S]

1. Sort all gap records by Final Priority Score descending.
2. Mark the top 3 as the active gap set.
3. If more than 3 gaps exist, mark remaining as deferred (Focus Rule: max 3 active).

Gate: ranked_and_capped: bool -- gaps are strictly sorted, top 3 identified, no more than 3 active.

• Pass: Step 5.
• Fail: re-sort. If ties exist, break by blast radius weight (higher wins), then by confidence gap (higher wins).

Step 5: Generate Recommended Action Per Gap [K-grounded]

Grounded in: gap dimension, evidence profile, current confidence state, deadline status.

For each active gap, determine:

• Action Type: RESEARCH, INTERVIEW, PRESELL, EXPERIMENT, MODEL_REVISION, ESCALATION, HALT, ARCHITECTURE_CHANGE, or SOLUTION_REDESIGN.
• Description: what exactly should be done.
• Expected Output: what evidence or state change should result.
• Evidence Target: which epistemic tier the action should produce (T1 or T2; never recommend T3 as a target).

Selection heuristic:

Gap Dimension	Default Action Type
EVIDENCE_STRENGTH	RESEARCH (if T1/T2 possible) or INTERVIEW (if T3 blocker)
PAIN_CLARITY	INTERVIEW or EXPERIMENT
SEGMENT_CLARITY	RESEARCH or INTERVIEW
ECONOMIC_VIABILITY	MODEL_REVISION or EXPERIMENT
VALUE_PROP_VALIDITY	PRESELL or EXPERIMENT
ARCHITECTURE_READINESS	ARCHITECTURE_CHANGE or RESEARCH
SOLUTION_ADEQUACY	SOLUTION_REDESIGN
GTM_FEASIBILITY	RESEARCH or EXPERIMENT
INTERNAL_CONTRADICTION	HALT (force resolution)
GOVERNOR_DECISION_REQUIRED	ESCALATION

Fabrication boundary: Do not invent specific market data, customer quotes, or quantitative evidence. Actions must describe what to gather, not assert what will be found.

Gate: actions_specified: bool -- every active gap has an action with all four fields populated. No action targets T3 as evidence output.

• Pass: output.
• Fail: revise action to target T1 or T2 evidence.

---

Output

Produce:

1. List of scored GapRecords (all gaps, not just top 3).
2. Top-3 priority list with recommended actions.
3. Deferred gaps list (if any, with reason for deferral).
4. Any blockers detected (sections with no desired state, contradictions).

---

Edge Cases

Condition	Handling
Section has no desired state defined	Create gap record with dimension EVIDENCE_STRENGTH, note "desired state missing -- cannot compute gap precisely"
All gaps score 0	Report: no actionable gaps. Check if register is genuinely complete or if desired states are too weak.
More than 10 gaps	Still score all. Top 3 active, rest deferred. Flag to gap-definer that gap count is high.
Tie in priority score	Break by blast radius weight (higher first), then confidence gap (higher first), then alphabetical by target.
Evidence for a gap is contradictory	Score evidence weakness as 3. Add note about contradiction.

Boundaries

In scope: Gap computation, scoring, ranking, action recommendation, blocker detection.

Out of scope: Running destruction protocol (gap-running-destruction), enforcing decision rules or setting readiness gates (gap-enforcing-decisions), writing to the register (agent handles I/O), conducting research or interviews (strategist skills).