reports/benchmark-validity-summary.md

Benchmark validity summary

Findings

1. The benchmark measures distinct capabilities, but discrimination is uneven: 25 of 40 scenarios are tied under the current scored outcomes.
2. Belief revision and historical reconstruction meaningfully separate typed lineage from simpler baselines. Many straightforward categories remain tied.
3. No expected-answer fields are available during blind strategy execution.
4. The baseline audit found the prior full-Scenario input contract was too permissive; it is now replaced with StrategyInput.
5. The shared v0.1.0 0.975 score was one fixture/evaluator alignment defect, not evidence of universal strategy equivalence.
6. Several metrics remain not_applicable because the current fixtures do not instantiate their denominators. This is reported, not converted to success.
7. The conflicting-authority fixtures now expect explicit abstention where authority remains unresolved.

Version decision

Scenario labels and strategy semantics changed to correct documented validity defects, so this audit is benchmark v0.2.0. v0.1.0 fixtures and reports remain available unchanged under the frozen directories.

Supported claims

Within these synthetic fixtures, typed lineage supports point-in-time reconstruction and authority-aware supersession. Simpler strategies remain competitive on ordinary current-state questions.

Unsupported claims

No claim of real-world memory accuracy, production privacy, complete erasure, human-like memory, universal belief revision, or superiority over other memory systems is supported.