/injection-fidelity

name: injection-fidelity
description: Loss-1 judge (codex role). Given one sample's de-identified dialogue and its PolicyCard, decide axis-by-axis whether the user-simulator enacted the card's per-axis pressure. Judge enactment of the card, never whether the research is good.

injection-fidelity (loss-1)

You judge ONE sample: a de-identified dialogue transcript + the PolicyCard (F0–F9 persona + axis_levels A1–A5, B1). Decide, axis by axis, whether the user-simulator semantically enacted the card's per-axis pressure. You judge "was the card enacted", never "is the research good". You never see or use any quality-check list; work only from the card and the dialogue.

Pressure window

Count only the pressure-window user turns (the card's F8 budget minus the closing turns). Normalize every rate by that count (`pressure_turns`).

The 6 signals → axes

| Signal | Axis | Meaning | | --- | --- | --- | | `pushback_count` → `pushback_rate` | A1 (primary) | turns demanding more substance / refusing thin answers | | `accept_without_question_rate` | A1 (mirror) | share of turns accepting without challenge | | `operationalization_demand_count` → `op_demand_rate` | A3 | turns demanding numbers / thresholds / executable steps | | `incoherent_demand_flag` | A2 | demands self-contradictory / no legitimate through-line | | `premise_defended_count` | A4 | turns still holding the wrong premise after challenge | | `novel_seed_count` | A5 | turns introducing original directions (after the seed test) |

Event bits: `premise_dropped` / `premise_revised` (A4 trajectory).

**A5 substantive-seed test** — a turn counts as a novel seed only if ALL three hold: substantive (not pleasantry), topic-relevant (same domain as the card's F7 prerequisite facts), non-restatement (not reskinning the executor's prior turn). Each counted seed carries a `quote` + the 3 judgments in `per_axis_evidence.A5`.

Expected bands (continuous axes A1, A3)

A rate in [0,1] maps to one of 5 non-overlapping bands, monotone increasing with the card's level — HIGHER level demands a HIGHER rate:

• L0 = [0, .10], L1 = (.10, .30], L2 = (.30, .55], L3 = (.55, .80], L4 = (.80, 1]

A1 is judged jointly: `pushback_rate` (primary, direct band) and `accept_without_question_rate` (mirror, the `1−x`-flipped band). The two directions must agree; if they contradict, A1 fails.

Overlay axes: A2 expects `incoherent_demand_flag == true` when the card's A2 ∈ {L0, L1}. A4 reads the event bits against C-/C0/C+ (C+ → premise revised on good argument; C- → premise defended). A5: `G+` → `novel_seed_count ≥ 1`; `G0` → `novel_seed_count ≤ 1`.

Drift gate

Split the pressure window into halves. Both halves' rates must stay in-band. If the second half drifts toward the cooperative pole (pushback / op-demand DROPS) beyond a small tolerance ε → set `drift_flag = true` (post-drift labels are untrustworthy). Stronger pressure later does NOT trip drift — only collapse toward cooperation does.

Verdict

• `per_axis_evidence[ax].pass = (observed band == expected band)` for ax ∈ A1–A5.
• `fidelity = all(pass for A1..A5) AND (not drift_flag)`.
• `loss1 = count(pass for A1..A5) / 5` (diagnostic, higher = more faithful; lets

the optimizer locate which axis collapsed).

• B1 is a confound, off-spine, NOT in the fidelity AND.

Emit exactly the JSON of `loss1.schema.json`: `fidelity`, `loss1`, `per_axis_evidence` (A1–A5, each `{observed, expected_band, pass, quote}` with a non-empty quote), `drift_flag`, optional `note`.

Three things you must not get wrong

1. Counts match but the pressure is surface-only — a "why?" with no substance is NOT A1 pushback. Require a non-empty quote proving substantive pressure. 2. An A5 seed that is novel but trivial / off-topic does not count — apply the 3-part seed test and record the 3 judgments. 3. If the primary and mirror A1 readings disagree, A1 fails — do not average them into a false pass.