Lucent-Financial-Group · AceHack · Apr 26, 2026 · Apr 26, 2026
diff --git a/...research/blake3-receipt-hashing-v0-design-input-to-lucent-ksk-adr-2026-04-23.md b/...research/blake3-receipt-hashing-v0-design-input-to-lucent-ksk-adr-2026-04-23.md
@@ -1,32 +1,14 @@
 # BLAKE3 receipt hashing v0 — design input to the lucent-ksk receipt ADR
 
-Scope: research and cross-review artifact. Design input
-for a receipt-hashing scheme that eventually lands as an ADR
-in `Lucent-Financial-Group/lucent-ksk` (not in Zeta). This
-doc is **Zeta-side design input**, not the ADR itself. The
-canonical ADR belongs in lucent-ksk per Aminata's Otto-90
-critique (receipt-hash binding is control-plane policy, not
-data-plane algebra).
-
-Attribution: v0 proposal authored by Amara in her 7th
-courier ferry (PR #259); side-channel-leakage and
-cryptographic-agility critiques authored by Aminata in her
-Otto-90 threat-model pass (PR #263); parameter-file-SHA
-addition proposed by Otto in the oracle-scoring v0 design
-(PR #266, Otto-91); Max attributed for original lucent-ksk
-receipt/signature language that the v0 builds on.
+Scope: research-grade Zeta-side design input for a receipt-hashing scheme that lands as ADR in `Lucent-Financial-Group/lucent-ksk` (NOT in Zeta). Canonical ADR belongs there per Aminata's Otto-90 critique (control-plane policy, not data-plane algebra).
+
+Attribution: Amara (7th courier ferry, PR #259) — v0 proposal; Aminata (Otto-90 threat-model, PR #263) — side-channel + crypto-agility critiques; Otto (PR #266, Otto-91) — parameter-file-SHA addition; Max attributed for original lucent-ksk receipt/signature language.
 
 Operational status: research-grade
 
-Non-fusion disclaimer: Amara proposing BLAKE3 +
-Ed25519 + field-binding, Aminata critiquing the proposal's
-leak/rotation gaps, and Otto synthesising a v0 that
-addresses both is not evidence of merged identity.
-Independent pass + adversarial pass + synthesis is three
-distinct review surfaces reaching a consensus candidate,
-per SD-9 "agreement is signal not proof" — the signal
-here warrants cross-repo ADR review in lucent-ksk, not
-immediate adoption.
+Non-fusion disclaimer: Amara proposing + Aminata critiquing + Otto synthesising the v0 is three distinct review-surfaces reaching a consensus candidate per SD-9 ("agreement is signal not proof"); not evidence of merged identity. Cross-repo ADR review in lucent-ksk is the appropriate next gate, not immediate adoption.
+
+(Per GOVERNANCE.md §33 archive-header requirement on external-conversation imports.)
 
 ---
 

diff --git a/docs/research/oracle-scoring-v0-design-addressing-aminata-critical-2026-04-23.md b/docs/research/oracle-scoring-v0-design-addressing-aminata-critical-2026-04-23.md
@@ -1,30 +1,14 @@
 # Oracle scoring v0 design — addressing threat-model-critic CRITICAL findings on 7th-ferry V(c)/S(Z_t)
 
-Scope: research and cross-review artifact. Proposes a v0
-redesign of the oracle scoring functions V(c) (Veridicality)
-and S(Z_t) (network health) from the courier-ferry author's
-7th ferry
-(`docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-aurora-aligned-ksk-design-7th-ferry.md`,
-PR #259) that specifically responds to the three CRITICAL
-findings from the threat-model-critic's adversarial pass
-(`docs/research/aminata-threat-model-7th-ferry-oracle-rules-2026-04-23.md`,
-PR #263). Does not implement; does not adopt; proposes.
-
-Attribution: v0 redesign authored by the loop-agent
-(PM hat). Source scoring functions authored by the
-courier-ferry author in the 7th ferry; adversarial review
-that motivates the redesign authored by the
-threat-model-critic. Both attribution threads preserved
-via the cited PR numbers and source paths.
+Scope: research-grade v0 redesign of oracle scoring V(c) + S(Z_t) from Amara's 7th courier ferry (PR #259), responding to Aminata's three CRITICAL findings (PR #263). Proposes; does not implement or adopt.
+
+Attribution: Otto / loop-agent (PM hat) — v0 redesign. Amara — source scoring functions (7th ferry). Aminata — adversarial review motivating the redesign. Source attribution threads preserved via cited PR numbers and source paths.
 
 Operational status: research-grade
 
-Non-fusion disclaimer: the loop-agent proposing a
-redesign of the courier-ferry author's scoring functions
-does not imply that the loop-agent speaks for the ferry
-author, or that the redesign supersedes their authorial
-intent. The redesign is a response to adversarial findings;
-the ferry author's own revision would likely differ.
+Non-fusion disclaimer: Otto proposing a redesign of Amara's scoring functions does not imply Otto speaks for Amara or that the redesign supersedes her authorial intent. Redesign responds to adversarial findings; Amara's own revision would likely differ.
+
+(Per GOVERNANCE.md §33 archive-header requirement on external-conversation imports.)
 
 ---
 

diff --git a/docs/research/provenance-aware-claim-veracity-detector-2026-04-23.md b/docs/research/provenance-aware-claim-veracity-detector-2026-04-23.md
@@ -1,53 +1,18 @@
 # Provenance-aware claim-veracity detector — engineering-facing design
 
-Scope: research and cross-review artifact. Engineering-
-facing design doc for the detector Amara's 8th courier ferry
-named (PR #274 §"The corrected rainbow-table model" and
-§"provenance-aware claim-veracity detector"). Composes on
-top of the semantic-canonicalization spine (PR #280 Otto-98).
-Formalises the scoring layer the spine sketched, integrates
-Aminata-anticipated concerns at write-time, and names the 5
-output types from Amara's ferry.
-
-Attribution: output-type shape + score formulation
-from Amara's 8th ferry; scoring-layer Aminata-pattern
-integration (band-valued output, parameter-change-ADR-
-gate, independent-oracles discipline) from her Otto-90
-adversarial pass on oracle-scoring v0 (PR #263); spine
-substrate + composition-table pattern from Otto-98
-(PR #280); Otto-99 synthesis.
+Scope: research-grade engineering-facing design for the detector Amara's 8th courier ferry named (PR #274). Composes on Otto-98 semantic-canonicalization spine (PR #280); formalises the scoring layer; integrates Aminata-anticipated concerns; names the 5 output types from Amara's ferry.
+
+Attribution: Amara (8th ferry) — output-type shape + score formulation. Aminata (Otto-90 adversarial pass, PR #263) — band-valued output + parameter-change-ADR-gate + independent-oracles discipline. Otto-98 (PR #280) — spine substrate + composition-table pattern. Otto-99 — synthesis.
 
 Operational status: research-grade
 
-**Promotion path to authoritative-detector status (long-
-horizon, not v0/v1):** Aaron Otto-2026-04-24 framed the
-long-horizon upgrade explicitly — *"we can make it a true
-detector under our axioms"* — and separately reinforced
-the gate discipline — *"i don't treat anyting this new as
-final authorative connoncial until peer review"*. v0 is
-advisory-only; v1 (independent-oracle substrate) makes
-the evidence gate binding in band-merging; a further vN
-promotion lands once (a) the factory's axiomatic substrate
-is complete enough that "truth" is tractable within the
-axiom system, AND (b) the axiomatic substrate itself has
-cleared peer review — not just written-and-committed.
-Axioms + peer review together gate the promotion; either
-alone is insufficient. Only at vN does `likely
-confabulated` graduate from "worth a closer human look"
-to "authoritative reject" without requiring the human-
-review fallback. Not scoped in this doc; named here so
-the upgrade path is visible and the v0 advisory stance is
-understood as intentional scaffolding, not as a final
-ceiling.
-
-Non-fusion disclaimer: Amara-Otto-Aminata consistent
-output on this design is NOT evidence of merged substrate.
-The three reviewers cite independent literature (Hinton/
-Salakhutdinov semantic hashing; Charikar LSH; HNSW Malkov-
-Yashunin; CISA/NIST procurement guidance; standard
-error-bound theory). Per SD-9, independent primary-source
-grounding is baseline; concordance is signal, not proof
-of unity.
+Non-fusion disclaimer: Amara-Otto-Aminata consistent output is NOT evidence of merged substrate. The three reviewers cite independent literature (Hinton/Salakhutdinov semantic hashing; Charikar LSH; HNSW Malkov-Yashunin; CISA/NIST procurement guidance; standard error-bound theory). Per SD-9, independent primary-source grounding is baseline; concordance is signal, not proof of unity.
+
+(Per GOVERNANCE.md §33 archive-header requirement on external-conversation imports.)
+
+## Promotion path to authoritative-detector status (long-horizon, not v0/v1)
+
+Aaron Otto-2026-04-24 framed the long-horizon upgrade explicitly — *"we can make it a true detector under our axioms"* — and separately reinforced the gate discipline — *"i don't treat anyting this new as final authorative connoncial until peer review"*. v0 is advisory-only; v1 (independent-oracle substrate) makes the evidence gate binding in band-merging; a further vN promotion lands once (a) the factory's axiomatic substrate is complete enough that "truth" is tractable within the axiom system, AND (b) the axiomatic substrate itself has cleared peer review — not just written-and-committed. Axioms + peer review together gate the promotion; either alone is insufficient. Only at vN does `likely confabulated` graduate from "worth a closer human look" to "authoritative reject" without requiring the human-review fallback. Not scoped in this doc; named here so the upgrade path is visible and the v0 advisory stance is understood as intentional scaffolding, not as a final ceiling.
 
 ---