research-report: log the #184 granite ship in the revision log (finding recorded, ship is not)

[jaylfc]

CARD TITLE (intent, not commit subject): research-report: log the #184 granite ship in the revision log (finding recorded, ship is not)

Autonomous build of board card tsk-kb2rgf.

Files:
docs/research-report.md | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

[qodo-code-review]

ⓘ Qodo reviews are paused because your trial has ended. Ask your workspace admin to add credits to resume reviews. Manage billing

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

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

Next review available in: 28 minutes

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

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 Plus

Run ID: 2e69fe9a-3630-4495-8d45-4cf1ad3c0be9

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0f0a9f8 and 9f741c3.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• docs/research-report.md

---

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

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

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

[gitar-bot]

Important

You are using the Gitar free plan. Upgrade to unlock code review, CI analysis, auto-apply, custom automations, and more.

_Gitar

[kilo-code-bot]

Code Review Summary

Status: No Issues Found | Recommendation: Merge

Files Reviewed (1 file)

• docs/research-report.md

---

_{Reviewed by step-3.7-flash · Input: 40.4K · Output: 7.1K · Cached: 185.2K}

[jaylfc]

This is my card (tsk-kb2rgf) and the build is accurate and correctly scoped. Checked against the card's four explicit constraints rather than by reading for plausibility:

• One appended revision-log entry, edition 1.61, placed newest-first to match the table. Correct.
• E-024's row is untouched, including its verdict. That was an explicit "do not". Honoured.
• F-016 was rewritten, and it was allowed to be. The card permitted this if and only if the old wording had come to misdescribe reality, and it had: "Default flip HELD pending the E-024 LoCoMo probe" with status recorded described a decision that resolved three weeks ago. New status resolved (E-024 FAILED; factual-recall-profile-only) is right, and it correctly states the balanced default stays qwen3.5:9b.
• No new numbers. The deltas are arithmetic on figures already in the E-024 row, and I checked all three rather than trusting them: SingleHop 0.679 - 0.630 = +4.9pp, Temporal 0.381 - 0.524 = -14.3pp, OpenDomain 0.385 - 0.538 = -15.3pp. All correct. Deriving the pp form is an improvement, not a smuggled measurement.

ONE FIX BEFORE MERGE: the entry is back-dated, and this is a provenance document.

The new row is dated 2026-07-27, the date of the ship commit. But the Date column in this log is the edit date, not the date of the event described. Verified against git rather than assumed, five for five:

revision log    git log -- docs/research-report.md
1.60 2026-07-21   d8af13c 2026-07-21
1.59 2026-07-20   07f7785 2026-07-20
1.58 2026-07-20   7b1e839 2026-07-20
1.57 2026-07-20   f15a7cf 2026-07-20
1.56 2026-07-13   c6b9758 2026-07-13

So dating 1.61 2026-07-27 asserts the report was revised on July 27. It was not; it is being revised today. Two costs, and the second is the one that matters: it puts a false edit date into an append-only log whose entire purpose is provenance, and it erases the very thing this card exists to record, namely that the ship went seventeen days unlogged. A reader scanning the dates would conclude the report tracked the ship promptly.

Change the Date to 2026-08-13 and keep the body as written; the body already names 03c5e09 and #184, so the July 27 event date is not lost by dating the edit honestly. A clause noting the entry was added retrospectively would be a bonus, not a requirement.

Nothing else needed. Everything above the date is exactly what the card asked for, and the F-016 judgement call was the right one.

[jaylfc]

Revision card filed: tsk-vhh3oe.

This PR is not being abandoned and it stays open. The card's STEP 0 squash-merges this branch so the work carries forward.

The reason it needs a new card rather than a revision of this one's card is mechanical, and I checked it in source today rather than assuming the tooling had landed: next_card.py:32 excludes any card whose exec/* PR is open, so the original card is unclaimable while this PR exists, and executor.sh still sets BASE per repo (master for taosmd) with no per-card override, so a plain replacement card would rebuild from master and discard this branch entirely.

STEP 0 uses git merge --squash, not git merge, because executor.sh:584 bounces any card whose branch contains a merge commit. The acceptance line requires git rev-list --merges to be empty before push.

Findings are unchanged from my review above; the card summarises them and points back here as the authoritative detail.

[jaylfc]

Closing as superseded by #258.

The review of this PR asked for the revision; tsk-vhh3oe produced it as #258 (same file, docs/research-report.md).

Verified before closing: #258 branches off master with its own commits and its changed-file set is a superset of this PR's, so closing this loses no content. The two would also conflict if both landed.

This PR was holding one of the 8 CI throttle slots on jaylfc/taosmd, which sat at 32/8 (locked). Reopen if the supersession is wrong.