Verification, Limits And The Next Build
Why This MattersRead the earlier reference in its original context, with its historical statements and limits preserved.
Review the v0.2 verification record and proposed next steps. Test whether readers can distinguish assets from cash flow, reserve breaches from unfunded needs, and calculations from overall decisions.
Checks Completed For This Release
- 42 automated accounting, scenario and boundary tests passed.
- 22 synthetic plan ledgers reconcile to their declared inputs.
- Five cases include 11 manually specified expected ending balances and retained dates of earlier shortages.
- PDF page order, printed numbers, page dimensions, extractable text and rendered layouts checked before delivery.
- Complete package includes editable text, rule/evidence registers, source, model, inputs, results and reproduction instructions.
What Remains Open
- No independent replication or external financial, legal, clinical or security audit.
- No validation of a composite score; no such score is defined.
- No participant results, preregistration, power calculation or comparative efficacy evidence.
- No probability estimates for the adverse scenarios; no promise that their set is exhaustive.
- No daily cash timing, contract-specific lender engine, tax engine or production website.
Next Milestone: V0.3 Usability And Specification Refinement
First review the charter’s values and intended audience. Then test whether readers can understand three critical distinctions: assets versus cash flow; a reserve breach versus an unfunded need; and a financial screen versus an overall decision. Use the counterexamples to revise language and remove burden.
In parallel, specify the within-month timing extension and contract-specific debt inputs using actual permitted source documents. Build an interface only after these semantics are stable. Any live user study or personal-data collection needs its own concrete protocol and authorization.