constitution · epochs · watch · epoch 3
llm.judgment
ev_42bda061b2a242ce760eb63fbabb1f9fc459b9b30bde7bc0ae81ba33d5d3ac14
kindllm.judgment
epoch3
recorded_at_ms1784427067082
previous_event_sha256ec6426fefdceae120fe0fa466242c4decb2f0aa88a04ec910fb390f1036cabba
schema_version2
links
- comparison_id: cmp_933a303bbd00c782d8e728d8bd7fd93370f7a5db5782190c4ee42b2993b4590b
- attempt_id: att_3fbd6b347c2e6ab0ef1e52f843d1e235d51d6cd223cd240108e9e902bbfdb793
- judgment_id: jud_00362a615808fae5938424d194b0dea3f8a60ab73e154a6341c09972e172a409
- epoch 3
payload
{
"attempt_id": "att_3fbd6b347c2e6ab0ef1e52f843d1e235d51d6cd223cd240108e9e902bbfdb793",
"comparison_id": "cmp_933a303bbd00c782d8e728d8bd7fd93370f7a5db5782190c4ee42b2993b4590b",
"explanation": "Side A delivers a coherent, security-focused change (fail-closed vote auth, mock-OAuth gating, Secure cookies, open-redirect hardening) with tests and doc updates, directly closing real vulnerabilities. Side B is a large architectural rewrite (scope->fractal tree/ItemId) that is plausible but riskier, less focused, and its terse 'reconfigure' message and broad renames (settlement->journal, groups->tree) suggest unreviewed churn without the same clear safety payoff.",
"judgment_id": "jud_00362a615808fae5938424d194b0dea3f8a60ab73e154a6341c09972e172a409",
"model_id": "~anthropic/claude-sonnet-latest",
"ratio": "7:3",
"summary": "~anthropic/claude-sonnet-latest: A (7:3)",
"winner": "A"
}