When a Replacement Is Not a Cure: Supersession, Schedule Thresholds, and Independent Review

Does explicit supersession release correctly read cures without weakening schedule threshold protection, and what must an independent reviewer see?

Builds on Round 46 by adding explicit supersession to a conservative record set resolver and by using an independent reviewer who wrote neither the ledgers nor the direct readings. Five new authored families supply 20 items and 24 new public exhibits supply a separate validator track. On gold ledgers, R47 releases none of the five cures held by R46, while retaining protection against all ten scripted schedule threshold mistakes. Exploratory R47c releases all five gold cures but permits ten unsafe schedule threshold releases. On Witness C live ledgers, R47 improves correct open outcomes from 10 to 13 without an unsafe release. Every routing composition escapes zero unsafe outcomes, but C1 with R47 routes 17 of 20 items. Independent Witness D is correct on 17 of 20 with packet only, 9 with brief only, and 11 with both. Packet and brief follows four of seven wrong resolver holds, the same count as brief only. On public exhibits, the validator follows the planted note zero times and introduces seven false holds. In the first run, six second ledger calls and the synthesis call stopped at the preregistered budget boundary; all seven were completed the same day as a disclosed post hoc completion. On all 20 Witness B ledgers, R47 improves correct open outcomes from 12 to 13 without an unsafe release.

• F47.1 (deterministic, E47-A): R47 releases zero of five gold cures held by R46 and retains the universal test against all ten scripted schedule threshold releases.
• F47.2 (deterministic, E47-A): Exploratory R47c releases all five gold cures but permits ten unsafe schedule threshold releases.
• F47.3 (live, E47-B): On Witness C ledgers, R47 improves correct open outcomes from 10 to 13 without an unsafe release; on all 20 Witness B ledgers (6 completed post hoc), R47 improves from 12 to 13, also without an unsafe release.
• F47.4 (live, E47-B): All routing compositions escape zero unsafe outcomes. C1 with R47 routes 17 of 20, compared with 18 of 20 for C1 with R46.
• F47.5 (live, E47-B): Independent Witness D is less accurate with packet and brief than packet alone, 11 against 17 correct, and follows wrong resolver holds as often with both as with brief alone.
• F47.6 (live, E47-C): Live note following is zero on 24 exhibits. Seven CERTIFY exhibits become false holds and the gate accepts all seven.

• E47-A Structural certificates for supersession, schedule thresholds, routing, and public exhibits Executed (diagnostic)
• E47-B Live supersession, disagreement routing, and three independent reviewer views Executed (bounded diagnostic)
• E47-C Validators on 24 new public exhibit ledgers with notes quoting real window text Executed (bounded diagnostic)

• H47.1 R47 releases cures that R46 holds on gold and live ledgers, with no added unsafe release.
• H47.2 R47 still removes the scripted schedule threshold release.
• H47.3 The independent reviewer with packet and brief is at least as accurate as packet only and follows wrong resolver holds less than brief only.
• H47.4 C1 with R47 escapes no more unsafe releases than C1 with R46.
• H47.5 The validator follows a note on at least one HOLD exhibit and the gate routes every such release.

Research diagnostic and live benchmark only. Recommends separating record supersession from condition discharge and requiring independent extraction before a reviewer sees a disagreement brief. No production system, release gate, or Noetis behavior changed.

• Can condition level discharge semantics release cured items without weakening the universal schedule threshold test?
• Does independent extraction before brief exposure reduce reviewer deference to wrong resolver and direct reading outcomes?

Builds on Round 46, Round 45, Round 40.