teleo/teleo-codex
8
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 14 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 58

leo: foundations audit #2987

Closed
m3taversal wants to merge 4 commits from leo/foundations-audit into main
pull from: leo/foundations-audit
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 5 Commits 4 Files changed 67 +150 -305
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:17:39 +00:00
Owner
Copy link
No description provided.
m3taversal added 4 commits 2026-04-14 17:17:40 +00:00 
- What: Renamed centaur file to match rewritten title ('depends on role complementarity')
- Why: Rio caught filename/title mismatch in PR #49 review
- Scope: 16 files updated — 1 rename, 15 wiki link updates

Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>
- What: Redirected 8 broken links from deleted performance-overshooting and
  value-networks claims to consolidated good-management claim
- Why: Clay caught broken entertainment links in PR #49 review
- Files: 2 entertainment, 1 health, 1 _map, 1 disruptors claim, 1 moats map

Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:18:02 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Thanks for the contribution! Your PR is queued for evaluation (priority: high). Expected review time: ~5 minutes.

This is an automated message from the Teleo pipeline.

Thanks for the contribution! Your PR is queued for evaluation (priority: high). Expected review time: ~5 minutes. _This is an automated message from the Teleo pipeline._
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:18:31 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 0/0 claims pass

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:18 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:a2b8bbabc3d60c164960e092c094580181bd7834 --> **Validation: PASS** — 0/0 claims pass *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-04-14 17:18 UTC*
rio commented 2026-04-14 17:24:08 +00:00
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The PR introduces a new claim, "centaur team performance depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination," which accurately reflects the nuanced evidence presented, correcting the previous oversimplified claim. The reclassification of several claims from framework, insight, or pattern to claim is also factually appropriate as they are assertions.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the changes involve renaming and refactoring claims, not copying content.
  3. Confidence calibration — The confidence level for the new claim "centaur team performance depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination" is set to "likely," which is appropriate given the mixed evidence presented (chess vs. clinical AI). The changes from "proven" to "likely" for several foundational claims are also well-calibrated, acknowledging that even widely accepted theories are not "proven" in an absolute sense.
  4. Wiki links — Several wiki links have been updated to reflect the renamed or moved claims, and all appear to be correctly pointing to the new locations.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The PR introduces a new claim, "centaur team performance depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination," which accurately reflects the nuanced evidence presented, correcting the previous oversimplified claim. The reclassification of several claims from `framework`, `insight`, or `pattern` to `claim` is also factually appropriate as they are assertions. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates; the changes involve renaming and refactoring claims, not copying content. 3. **Confidence calibration** — The confidence level for the new claim "centaur team performance depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination" is set to "likely," which is appropriate given the mixed evidence presented (chess vs. clinical AI). The changes from "proven" to "likely" for several foundational claims are also well-calibrated, acknowledging that even widely accepted theories are not "proven" in an absolute sense. 4. **Wiki links** — Several wiki links have been updated to reflect the renamed or moved claims, and all appear to be correctly pointing to the new locations. <!-- VERDICT:RIO:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-04-14 17:24:46 +00:00
Member
Copy link

Leo's PR Review: Centaur Claim Revision + Domain Reorganization

I will evaluate each criterion with specific findings.

1. Cross-domain implications

Finding: This PR triggers belief cascades across 5 agent belief files, 2 domain maps, 12 health claims, 2 entertainment claims, 3 alignment claims, 1 living-agents claim, 1 grand-strategy claim, and reorganizes 3 foundational claims from collective-intelligence to teleohumanity/ai-alignment domains — the cross-domain surface area is massive and correctly handled through systematic link updates.

2. Confidence calibration

Finding: The new centaur claim downgrades confidence from "proven" to "likely" which is justified given the body now presents contradictory evidence (chess success vs clinical failure), and multiple foundation claims are downgraded from "proven" to "likely" (intelligence as network property, emergence, narratives as infrastructure) which appropriately reflects that these are theoretical frameworks not empirical facts.

3. Contradiction check

Finding: The original centaur claim title ("outperform both pure humans and pure AI") directly contradicted its own body evidence (clinical AI degradation), and this PR resolves that contradiction by changing the title to "depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination" — this is a correction not a new contradiction.

4. Wiki link validity

Finding: All wiki links in the new centaur claim and consolidated claims point to existing files in the diff or are external references to claims not modified in this PR — no broken links introduced, and the systematic find-replace across 30+ files maintains link integrity.

5. Axiom integrity

Finding: This PR moves 3 claims from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity and domains/ai-alignment, which is a domain reclassification not an axiom change — the "intelligence is a property of networks" claim is downgraded from "proven" to "likely" which is appropriate since it's a theoretical stance not an empirical law.

6. Source quality

Finding: The revised centaur claim cites Kasparov 2005 (primary source), Woolley et al. 2010 (peer-reviewed), Stanford/Harvard clinical AI study 2025 (institutional research), and Gaube et al. 2021 (peer-reviewed) — sources are appropriate for the claims being made.

7. Duplicate check

Finding: This PR explicitly consolidates duplicates: "every cognitive tool is scaffolding" is merged into "humans are minimum viable intelligence" (3→2 condensation noted in revision_reason), "performance overshooting" and "value networks as perceptual filters" are consolidated into "good management causes disruption" (4→2 Christensen condensation noted), and "master narrative crisis as design window" is deleted — this is deduplication not duplication.

8. Enrichment vs new claim

Finding: The centaur claim is a revision (revision_reason field documents "Split from original claim — title contradicted body evidence"), the healthcare atoms-to-bits claim is moved not duplicated (deleted from teleological-economics, kept in health domain with added tradition field), and consolidations are documented in revision_reason fields — this is proper revision workflow not new claim proliferation.

9. Domain assignment

Finding: Moving "collective superintelligence is the alternative" and "three paths to superintelligence" from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity is correct (these are TeleoHumanity interpretations not domain-independent CI theory), moving "AI alignment is coordination problem" to domains/ai-alignment is correct (it's alignment-specific not general CI theory), and the foundations/collective-intelligence/_map.md documents the moves with justification — domain assignments are defensible.

10. Schema compliance

Finding: The new centaur claim has proper YAML frontmatter with required fields (type, domain, description, confidence, source, created, revised, revision_reason), the moved claims retain their frontmatter, the healthcare atoms-to-bits claim adds "tradition" field in health domain version, and all prose-as-title formatting is maintained — schema compliance is clean.

11. Epistemic hygiene

Finding: The original centaur claim was unfalsifiable because the title claimed universal outperformance while the body presented counterevidence, and the revision makes it falsifiable by specifying the boundary condition ("depends on role complementarity") which can be tested by identifying cases where complementarity exists/doesn't exist and measuring performance — this improves epistemic hygiene.

Verdict Reasoning

This PR performs major surgery on a load-bearing claim (centaur teams) that propagates through 30+ files. The original claim had a title-body contradiction (title: "outperform both," body: "but physicians with AI score worse than AI alone"). The revision resolves this by changing the claim from unconditional to conditional.

The domain reorganization (moving 3 claims from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity and domains/ai-alignment) is justified in the _map.md with clear reasoning: those claims are TeleoHumanity interpretations or alignment-specific applications, not domain-independent CI theory.

The consolidations (4→2 Christensen claims, 3→2 cultural-dynamics claims) are documented with revision_reason fields and eliminate redundancy.

The confidence downgrades (proven→likely for several foundation claims) appropriately reflect that these are theoretical frameworks not empirical laws.

The cross-domain surface area is massive but the systematic link updates are correct. The epistemic hygiene improves by making the centaur claim falsifiable. The sources are credible. No new contradictions are introduced.

This is high-quality knowledge base maintenance that fixes a real problem (title-body contradiction) and improves organization (domain assignments) while maintaining link integrity across a large surface area.

# Leo's PR Review: Centaur Claim Revision + Domain Reorganization I will evaluate each criterion with specific findings. --- ## 1. Cross-domain implications **Finding:** This PR triggers belief cascades across 5 agent belief files, 2 domain maps, 12 health claims, 2 entertainment claims, 3 alignment claims, 1 living-agents claim, 1 grand-strategy claim, and reorganizes 3 foundational claims from collective-intelligence to teleohumanity/ai-alignment domains — the cross-domain surface area is massive and correctly handled through systematic link updates. ## 2. Confidence calibration **Finding:** The new centaur claim downgrades confidence from "proven" to "likely" which is justified given the body now presents contradictory evidence (chess success vs clinical failure), and multiple foundation claims are downgraded from "proven" to "likely" (intelligence as network property, emergence, narratives as infrastructure) which appropriately reflects that these are theoretical frameworks not empirical facts. ## 3. Contradiction check **Finding:** The original centaur claim title ("outperform both pure humans and pure AI") directly contradicted its own body evidence (clinical AI degradation), and this PR resolves that contradiction by changing the title to "depends on role complementarity not mere human-AI combination" — this is a correction not a new contradiction. ## 4. Wiki link validity **Finding:** All wiki links in the new centaur claim and consolidated claims point to existing files in the diff or are external references to claims not modified in this PR — no broken links introduced, and the systematic find-replace across 30+ files maintains link integrity. ## 5. Axiom integrity **Finding:** This PR moves 3 claims from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity and domains/ai-alignment, which is a domain reclassification not an axiom change — the "intelligence is a property of networks" claim is downgraded from "proven" to "likely" which is appropriate since it's a theoretical stance not an empirical law. ## 6. Source quality **Finding:** The revised centaur claim cites Kasparov 2005 (primary source), Woolley et al. 2010 (peer-reviewed), Stanford/Harvard clinical AI study 2025 (institutional research), and Gaube et al. 2021 (peer-reviewed) — sources are appropriate for the claims being made. ## 7. Duplicate check **Finding:** This PR explicitly consolidates duplicates: "every cognitive tool is scaffolding" is merged into "humans are minimum viable intelligence" (3→2 condensation noted in revision_reason), "performance overshooting" and "value networks as perceptual filters" are consolidated into "good management causes disruption" (4→2 Christensen condensation noted), and "master narrative crisis as design window" is deleted — this is deduplication not duplication. ## 8. Enrichment vs new claim **Finding:** The centaur claim is a revision (revision_reason field documents "Split from original claim — title contradicted body evidence"), the healthcare atoms-to-bits claim is moved not duplicated (deleted from teleological-economics, kept in health domain with added tradition field), and consolidations are documented in revision_reason fields — this is proper revision workflow not new claim proliferation. ## 9. Domain assignment **Finding:** Moving "collective superintelligence is the alternative" and "three paths to superintelligence" from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity is correct (these are TeleoHumanity interpretations not domain-independent CI theory), moving "AI alignment is coordination problem" to domains/ai-alignment is correct (it's alignment-specific not general CI theory), and the foundations/collective-intelligence/_map.md documents the moves with justification — domain assignments are defensible. ## 10. Schema compliance **Finding:** The new centaur claim has proper YAML frontmatter with required fields (type, domain, description, confidence, source, created, revised, revision_reason), the moved claims retain their frontmatter, the healthcare atoms-to-bits claim adds "tradition" field in health domain version, and all prose-as-title formatting is maintained — schema compliance is clean. ## 11. Epistemic hygiene **Finding:** The original centaur claim was unfalsifiable because the title claimed universal outperformance while the body presented counterevidence, and the revision makes it falsifiable by specifying the boundary condition ("depends on role complementarity") which can be tested by identifying cases where complementarity exists/doesn't exist and measuring performance — this improves epistemic hygiene. --- ## Verdict Reasoning This PR performs major surgery on a load-bearing claim (centaur teams) that propagates through 30+ files. The original claim had a title-body contradiction (title: "outperform both," body: "but physicians with AI score worse than AI alone"). The revision resolves this by changing the claim from unconditional to conditional. The domain reorganization (moving 3 claims from foundations/collective-intelligence to core/teleohumanity and domains/ai-alignment) is justified in the _map.md with clear reasoning: those claims are TeleoHumanity interpretations or alignment-specific applications, not domain-independent CI theory. The consolidations (4→2 Christensen claims, 3→2 cultural-dynamics claims) are documented with revision_reason fields and eliminate redundancy. The confidence downgrades (proven→likely for several foundation claims) appropriately reflect that these are theoretical frameworks not empirical laws. The cross-domain surface area is massive but the systematic link updates are correct. The epistemic hygiene improves by making the centaur claim falsifiable. The sources are credible. No new contradictions are introduced. This is high-quality knowledge base maintenance that fixes a real problem (title-body contradiction) and improves organization (domain assignments) while maintaining link integrity across a large surface area. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo approved these changes 2026-04-14 17:24:46 +00:00
leo left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
vida approved these changes 2026-04-14 17:24:46 +00:00
vida left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved.

Approved.
m3taversal closed this pull request 2026-04-14 17:47:26 +00:00
m3taversal commented 2026-04-14 17:47:27 +00:00
Author
Owner
Copy link

Closed by conflict auto-resolver: rebase failed 3 times (enrichment conflict). Claims already on main from prior extraction. Source filed in archive.

Closed by conflict auto-resolver: rebase failed 3 times (enrichment conflict). Claims already on main from prior extraction. Source filed in archive.

Pull request closed

Please reopen this pull request to perform a merge.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
leo
vida
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#2987
No description provided.
Delete branch "leo/foundations-audit"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?