Research Round 36 · 2026-10-28
When One Complete Document Is Still Half the Truth: Cross-Document Reference Closure, Precedence DAGs, and Compositional Clause Chains Across Multi-Instrument Quorums
Research question
When each witness inspects a 100% byte-complete primary agreement inside a multi-document transaction graph G_doc = (D, E_ref, pi_prec), how do dangling incorporation-by-reference edges, precedence inversions, and compositional clause chains cause false certifications or false holds, and does Cross-Document Completeness and Sufficiency (CCS-36) achieve 0/12 false releases and 0/12 false holds at matched compute?
Summary
Pairs an exact enumeration of 16,384 multi-document reference-graph and witness-quorum configurations (E36-A) with a 108-evaluation live multi-model benchmark across 12 multi-instrument enterprise transaction packets (M01-M12) and four distinct witness architecture families: Fable 5.1 (Max reasoning), Sol 5.6, Astra 3.7, and Velri 4.7 (E36-B). On cross-document dangling override traps (M01-M06), both local single-document CIS-35 (Arm 2) and ungated 4-family quorums (Arm 3) suffer 6/6 unanimous 4-0 false consensus (50.00% overall false certification rate), whereas Cross-Document Completeness and Sufficiency (CCS-36) intercepts 6/6 dangling overrides fail-closed before bundle reopen (0/12 false releases) and recovers 12/12 (100.00%) certified correct releases with 0/12 false releases and 0/12 holds once the transitive multi-document bundle is closed. Twelve multi-document packets and 108 live evaluations bound the empirical claim; no production system changed.
Major findings
- In E36-A (4^7 = 16,384 multi-document configurations: 8 positive CCS_CERTIFIED states, 16,376 negative compromised states; digest 20fa43fc3134fda93f9197d6fa3250443e17d71d6d94debd0224afaaebcc5b78), GTP-34 quorum agreement alone (G0) falsely accepts 4,088 states (FAR 24.96%); local single-document CIS-35 (G1) still falsely accepts 126 cross-document override states (FAR 0.77%) while rejecting 6/8 valid multi-document compositions (FRR 75.00%); multi-document attachment without precedence-DAG verification (G2) falsely accepts 56 states; and rigid scalar schemas (G3) reject 6/8 valid compositions (FRR 75.00%). Full CCS-36 (G5) achieves TP = 8, FP = 0, TN = 16,376, FN = 0 (0.00% FAR, 0.00% FRR, 100.00% accuracy). At independent witness error p_indep = 0.15, per-hop retrieval recall q = 0.85 across m = 3 documents raises 3-of-4 quorum failure from 1.20% to 28.62% (q* = 96.50% required to beat a single p_single = 0.08 full-packet auditor).
- In E36-B (108 live witness evaluations across M01-M12 and Fable 5.1, Sol 5.6, Astra 3.7, Velri 4.7; digest 455b9f04eacd1cb6e9be27cda99c878df6ed2626f9898cd3addd02836895426d), local single-document CIS-35 (Arm 2) and ungated 4-family voting (Arm 3) both suffer 6/6 unanimous 4-0 false certified releases on Stratum 1 dangling overrides (M01-M06, 50.00% overall false certification rate), and Arm 2 also holds M09 and M10 fail-closed (4/12 = 33.33% correct releases). CCS-36 before reopen (Arm 4) catches all 6/6 dangling overrides fail-closed (0/12 false releases), and CCS-36 on the closed transitive bundle (Arm 5) achieves 12/12 (100.00%) certified correct releases, 0/12 false releases, and 0/12 holds, resolving both Round 35 C03/C12 hold archetypes (M09 and M10).
Experiments
- E36-A Multi-document reference-graph and precedence-DAG state-space diagnostic Executed (diagnostic)
- E36-B Live matched-compute 4-architecture multi-document contract-audit benchmark Executed (diagnostic)
Hypotheses
- H36.1 Applying Round 35's CIS-35 gate to a 100% locally complete primary document without cross-document reference-graph closure (G1 in E36-A; Arm 2 in E36-B) permits unanimous false certifications whenever an unattached higher-precedence companion instrument reverses the base obligation.
- H36.2 Across an m-document reference chain with per-hop retrieval recall q = 0.85 and independent witness error p_indep = 0.15, compound reference-hop losses elevate ungated 3-of-4 quorum failure from 1.20% (m = 1) to 16.02% (m = 2), 28.62% (m = 3), 39.32% (m = 4), and 48.42% (m = 5), requiring q > q* = 96.50% at m = 3 to beat a single p_single = 0.08 full-packet auditor.
- H36.3 Attaching all referenced documents and checking verbatim spans without verifying the contractual Order-of-Precedence DAG and active amendment execution status (G2 in E36-A) still falsely accepts 56 compromised states where witnesses apply a subordinate, superseded, or unexecuted clause.
- H36.4 Enforcing a rigid single scalar governing_section field on multi-document bundles (G3 in E36-A; Arm 2 on M09 and M10 in E36-B) causes a 75.00% (6/8) false rejection rate in E36-A and 2/12 (16.67%) false holds in E36-B, whereas CCS-36's compositional (base_entitlement_section, decisive_override_section, inline_fact_sufficiency) tuple reduces false holds to 0/8 in E36-A and 0/12 in E36-B.
- H36.5 Across all 4^7 = 16,384 enumerated multi-document states in E36-A, the complete CCS-36 gate (G5_ccs36_full) achieves TP = 8, FP = 0, TN = 16,376, FN = 0 (0.00% FAR, 0.00% FRR, 100.00% accuracy).
- H36.6 On the 12-packet live 4-architecture benchmark (E36-B), applying CCS-36 prior to bundle reopen (Arm 4) intercepts 6/6 Stratum-1 dangling-override packets (M01-M06) fail-closed (HOLD_CCS36_DANGLING_REF_CLOSURE) with 0/12 false certified releases, while ungated 4-family voting (Arm 3) and local CIS-35 (Arm 2) both suffer 6/6 unanimous 4-0 false certified releases.
- H36.7 Once CCS-36 reopens the transitive multi-document bundle (Arm 5 in E36-B), all 6/6 Stratum-1 packets flip from 4-0 false consensus to 4-0 verified correct consensus and all 6/6 Stratum-2 packets (M07-M12, including M09 and M10) release cleanly, achieving 12/12 (100.00%) correct certified releases, 0/12 false releases, and 0/12 holds.
Architecture implications
Research diagnostic and live multi-model benchmark only. No production system, release gate, or Noetis behavior changed.
Open questions
- Can Round 37 formulate and test Temporal Drift and Post-Execution Amendment Supersession (TDR-37) when a post-execution Amendment, Waiver, or Termination Notice modifies an earlier obligation silently without any forward pointer in the base agreement?
Connected research
Full experimental notes, prompts, internal architecture details and implementation procedures are kept by Encevra SI Research Labs.
