# EM-0027 execution plan

- Object ID: `em:documentation:sha256:9f0ea5058322fefe7181cb3bf2d553f0627c08d8538ea7dc86fcd9cc0a3fd82c`
- Kind: `documentation`
- Repository path: [`docs/execution-plans/EM-0027.md`](https://github.com/yoheinakajima/epistemedia/blob/f92846570180dfa4511263f8ba98ecd18f7772c9/docs/execution-plans/EM-0027.md)
- Content digest: `c393d734d99dcb4ded23e5b3b0174feef1fa20ffdac6c9d36516ca8c0a170210`

**Also filed under:** [Disclosure and Public Projection](https://epistemedia.org/topics/disclosure/), [Epistemedia](https://epistemedia.org/topics/epistemedia/), [Epistemic Mesh Protocol](https://epistemedia.org/topics/epistemic-mesh/), [Sovereign Realm Federation](https://epistemedia.org/topics/federation/), [Autonomous Governance](https://epistemedia.org/topics/governance/), [Knowledge Objects](https://epistemedia.org/topics/knowledge-objects/), [Human and Agent Interfaces](https://epistemedia.org/topics/public-interfaces/), [Releases and Reproducibility](https://epistemedia.org/topics/releases/), [Research Program](https://epistemedia.org/topics/research-program/), [Security and Adversarial Robustness](https://epistemedia.org/topics/security/)

## Source content

# EM-0027 execution plan

Status: complete. Three independent source-readiness packets were exact-head reviewed and admitted
through protected PR `#50` at merge commit `cbb029bd336404e5bc654e939308247317eaa153`.

## Objective

Verify whether the GPT-4 bar-exam percentile, Mehrabian 7–38–55, and fact-check-effectiveness
candidates have bounded, credential-free, license-aware primary-source paths suitable for later
case research.

## Authority and accepted base

- immutable task: tasks/contracts/EM-0027.json;
- accepted base: e9ad62b18f21594258643694c55709f78b4f9a50;
- owner and editorial direction: docs/editorial/how-we-know-case-roadmap.md;
- allowed changes: this plan, the research summary, three separate preliminary packets, and
  append-only run receipts.

## Method

1. Assign one candidate per context-isolated source scout.
2. Prefer primary research, official records, author or institutional manuscripts, registered
   data/code, and authoritative examination statistics.
3. Record exact work and edition identity, URLs, identifiers, retrieval date, media type, access,
   license or quotation treatment, and unresolved artifacts.
4. Keep circulated propositions separate from tested or reported propositions.
5. Map data, author, method, material, citation, comparison-class, and derivation dependence
   without converting expected topology into an evidentiary count.
6. Search for corrections, replies, reanalyses, supersession, and material counterevidence.
7. End each packet with a provisional readiness disposition and bounded cost estimate.
8. Obtain fresh-clone independent review before protected merge.

## Boundaries

- no complete literature review, pooled effect estimate, or scientific verdict;
- no dossier, feature manifest, catalog admission, lens change, or public claim;
- no credentialed source, account, secret, billable provider, or redistributed restricted text;
- no cross-candidate evidence count;
- unknown and inaccessible artifacts remain visible.

## Validation

- compare every packet with EM-0027 acceptance and the retained editorial retrieval questions;
- verify identifiers, edition labels, and access/license language;
- verify all numerical statements have an authoritative locator or are clearly planning estimates;
- compare exact changed paths with task authority;
- run git diff --check and full make check;
- require independent source-identity and recommendation review on the exact head.

## Draft-stage result

- GPT-4 bar-exam percentile: **HOLD** pending at-launch comparison-source and derivation closure.
- Mehrabian 7–38–55: **HOLD** pending primary-access, `7%` derivation, and edition closure.
- Fact-check effectiveness: **HOLD** pending corrected-analysis artifacts, outcome boundaries, and
  report-level overlap mapping.

The packets are preliminary retrieval maps only. They do not authorize a Case 002 choice,
evidence admission, a scientific verdict, catalog generation, or deployment. Before any protected
merge, an independent reviewer must verify every source identity, access/license statement,
lineage boundary, unresolved gap, and disposition on the exact candidate head.

## Validation record

- Relative repository links resolve to the three separate packets and their index.
- The exact changed-path set is confined to the task's `research/**`, `docs/**`, and append-only
  `runs/**` authority.
- `git diff --cached --check` passed.
- `make check` passed 80 tests, accepted-input validation, disclosure audit with no findings,
  deterministic independent rebuild, and unchanged accepted source state.
- Run receipt: `runs/proposals/20260823T160854Z-28cbe2de225f.json`.
- Independent-review corrections preserved the Martínez `45th/48th` discrepancy, added the exact
  *Silent Messages* scan URL and unstable-carrier limitation, and pinned the 2025
  Chan–Albarracín reply identity and dependence. Corrected-head validation receipt:
  `runs/proposals/20260823T164540Z-c67b9ff664a4.json`.
- Second-round review corrections bound the current NBU scan bytes/digest, described the P2
  anonymous session-dependent access flow, corrected Nathan Walter's name, recorded known
  Ecker/Swire-Thompson author-program overlap with Case 001 while leaving item overlap unknown,
  and pinned the Porter–Wood boundary review. Validation receipt:
  `runs/proposals/20260823T170317Z-e8eef36305f6.json`.
- Third-round review correction records the confirmed Swire-Thompson et al. (2022) report-level
  overlap between the Chan–Albarracín correction and Case 001 while leaving effect-size, item,
  and participant-data overlap unresolved. Validation receipt:
  `runs/proposals/20260823T174049Z-f624b35ab550.json`.

The validation environment reused an already installed project virtual environment while forcing
this checkout's `src` directory first on `PYTHONPATH`; it performed no dependency installation or
new provider retrieval.

## Independent review and protected admission

- accepted base: `50af5bb295634bc17ec6ad0697e1806e6cee6ba9`;
- independently reviewed head: `ae5b2025a8400a1e12bd17ad6b70143b56d57d39`;
- required Validate run/job: `32655948195` / `97234603952`, conclusion `success`;
- protected squash merge: PR `#50` at `cbb029bd336404e5bc654e939308247317eaa153`;
- merge tree: `5ef201c025b4a9f49e43251af569c0a951a18662`;
- merge parent: exact accepted base `50af5bb295634bc17ec6ad0697e1806e6cee6ba9`;
- source branch deleted after merge; no ruleset bypass was used.

Independent review retained all three dispositions as **HOLD**. Admission of this preliminary
mapping did not admit a dossier, establish a scientific verdict, or publish any of the three
candidates as a How We Know case.