Jump to content

Calibration Report Standard Format: Difference between revisions

From The Sovereign Games
← Older edit

Sovereign (talk | contribs)

3 user groups
3,581 edits
VisualWikitext
Calibration Report Standard Format v0.3 | Added exact heading format (page name as literal substring, fixed Freeze/Annotation collision), required top-of-report bulleted field order, formalized Edit Summary as required paired companion with its own standard, added non-exhaustive example section headers to give AI reviewers a concrete depth standard. See Talk for full report.
Calibration Report | 2026-07-24 | v0.5-dev | Self-Assessment | Calibration Report Standard Format Merge: event header table + method/standing split + objective/impact/evidence basis; formal pre-cal and confirmation tiers; conditional omit. Not a second standard page. Dates unchanged.
 
(18 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
|status = Active Development
|status = Active Development
}}
}}
 
'''Canonical Question:''' What does a Talk page entry need to contain before it counts as an official Calibration Report, rather than informal discussion?
= Calibration Report Standard Format =
Not everything written on a Calibration Log or hub Talk page is a Calibration Report. This page defines the required elements that make an entry '''official''' — findable, attributable, and usable as permanent calibration history — and the '''event-centric''' shape that scales from structural pre-cal to full development freezes.
'''Visible reporting link:''' Operators file reports on the page’s Talk and/or Calibration Log per [[Calibration Log: When to Create One]]; this page only defines shape and minimums.
{{GameModule
{{GameModule
| type = Meta & Framework
| type = Meta & Framework
<!-- HIDDEN GUIDE: existing controlled vocabulary only -->
| category = [[:Category:Meta & Framework|Meta & Framework]]
| category = [[:Category:Meta & Framework|Meta & Framework]]
| Functional Layer = Governance
<!-- HIDDEN GUIDE: must match existing Category page -->
| Calibration Type = Governance
<!-- HIDDEN GUIDE: Governance, Diagnostic, Maintenance, Framework, Calibration — param name Calibration Type; displays as Functional Layer -->
| Application Layer = Framework Infrastructure
| Application Layer = Framework Infrastructure
| Version = 0.3
<!-- HIDDEN GUIDE: Multi-Layer, Framework Infrastructure, Individual, Institutional, Civilizational -->
| Version = 0.5
| Maturity = Experimental
| Maturity = Experimental
| Last Updated = {{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{CURRENTMONTH}}-{{CURRENTDAY}}
<!-- HIDDEN GUIDE: Experimental, Development, Confirmed, Field Validated, Reference Standard Candidate -->
| description = Defines the required elements of an official Calibration Report and its paired Edit Summary — including exact heading format, AI-reviewer attribution standards, negative-scope discipline, and a non-exhaustive vocabulary of situational section headers for use by any AI or human calibrator.
| Last Updated = 2026-07-20
<!-- CRITICAL: static only. Must match review_date. FORBIDDEN: magic words -->
| description = Required elements and event-centric shape of official Calibration Reports and paired edit summaries — heading standards, method vs standing, tiers by procedure type, AI attribution, conditional sections, negative-scope discipline.
}}
}}
 
== Principles ==
'''Canonical Question:''' What does a Talk page entry need to contain before it counts as an official Calibration Report, rather than informal discussion?
* Report the '''calibration event''', not only a software-style changelog.
 
* '''Method''' (how reviewed) and '''Standing''' (Self-Assessment vs Confirmed Rating) are different fields.
= Calibration Report Standard Format =
* '''AI round-robin or multi-model agreement does not by itself create Confirmed standing.'''
 
* '''Validation may stay Low''' while structure is frozen — different quality dimensions advance independently.
Not everything written on a Calibration Log or hub Talk page is a Calibration Report. This page defines the required elements that make an entry official — findable, attributable, and usable as part of a page's permanent calibration history.
* Narrative '''once'''; <code>drift_report_status</code> for query visibility — no triple-log into [[Breadcrumb Tracking]].
 
* Conditional sections (Nonconformance, Breadcrumb, Readiness Gap, Fields table): '''omit entirely''' when unused — do not force empty “None” headings (exception: Open Items may explicitly state none / structural-only none where the tier requires the section).
== Required Heading Format ==
* Minor edit with no claim, rating, or status effect → '''edit summary only''' (no full report).
 
== Heading standard ==
'''Heading format (required, exact):''' `== Calibration Report — [Page] — [Date] ([Annotation]) ==` — e.g. `== Calibration Report — Slave Owner Game/Effects — 2026-07-14 (Structural Freeze) ==`. The page name must appear as a literal substring of the heading itself, not only in a field below it — this is what makes browser Find land exactly on the correct report, every time, with no false matches from casual mentions elsewhere on the page. Annotation (Structural Freeze, Minor Correction, etc.) is optional and omitted if not applicable.
A Calibration Report heading must contain, in this order:
 
# The literal phrase '''Calibration Report'''
== Required Top-of-Report Fields ==
# The exact page name (searchable substring)
 
# The date in <code>YYYY-MM-DD</code>
Immediately below the heading, in this exact bulleted order:
Optional annotation in parentheses: report type / tier (e.g. Structural Pre-Cal, Structural Freeze, Confirmation, Ripple-Triggered, Nonconformance).
 
'''Valid examples:'''
```wikicode
* <code>== Calibration Report — Slave Owner Game/Effects — 2026-07-14 ==</code>
* Page: [[Exact Page Name]]
* <code>== Calibration Report — Slave Owner Game/Effects — 2026-07-14 (Structural Freeze) ==</code>
* Summary: One or two sentences — what the page is/does.
* <code>== Calibration Report — Calibration Report Standard Format — 2026-07-24 (Standard merge) ==</code>
* Reviewer: [Name]
== Calibration procedure types ==
* Review Type: Self-Assessment / Confirmed Rating, plus round-robin details if applicable
```
 
Each field on its own bullet, not merged — Reviewer and Review Type are distinct fields (who vouches for this, how much weight that vouching carries) and should never share one line.
 
== Required Elements ==
 
{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable"
! Element !! Required? !! Purpose
! Type !! Trigger !! Touches review_date / Last Calibration? !! Report weight
|-
|-
| '''Heading with date, page, annotation''' (exact format above) || Yes || Anchor linking, chronological order, and precise Find-search targeting.
| '''Pre-Calibration Check (pre-cal)'''
| Before content/governance work; structure only
| '''Never'''
| Light tier (below)
|-
|-
| '''Page''' (real wikilink) || Yes, on any shared hub Talk page || Without this, a report on a multi-page hub log is unattributable.
| '''Development'''
| Building or revising claims, definitions, structure
| Yes, when this pass is a real content/governance calibration
| Full core + contextual as applicable
|-
|-
| '''Summary''' || Yes, on any shared hub Talk page || Lets a reader identify the right report without opening the linked page first.
| '''Confirmation'''
| Cycle due / overdue; re-verify without intending content change
| Yes, when re-verification is performed (including “nothing wrong”)
| Short confirmation tier — '''silent “all fine” is not allowed'''
|-
|-
| '''Reviewer''' || Yes || Attributes the report to a person.
| '''Ripple-Triggered'''
| Upstream Core dependency calibration per dependency rules
| Per whether content/status actually changed
| Must cite upstream page and change; weight matches work done
|}
Pre-cal is '''not''' a calibration. Confirmation without a short report defeats cycle tracking.
== Required event header (all official reports) ==
Immediately under the heading, use this table (or the same fields in this order as labeled lines if a table is impractical on a given Talk skin):
<pre><nowiki>
{| class="wikitable"
! colspan="2" | Calibration event
|-
|-
| '''Review Type''' || Yes || States the report's own standing per [[Reference Standards]].
| '''Page''' || [[Exact page name]]
|-
|-
| '''AI-Reviewer Attribution''' (see below) || Yes, if AI-assisted round-robin was involved || Prevents ambiguity about which model reviewed what, and whether literal text or a summary was reviewed.
| '''Date''' || YYYY-MM-DD
|-
|-
| '''Summary of Changes''' || Yes || The factual record of what was done.
| '''Report type / tier''' || Structural pre-cal / Development / Confirmation / Ripple-Triggered / Nonconformance / …
|-
|-
| '''Reasoning / Rationale''' || Yes || Preserves the "why," distinct from the "what."
| '''Calibration objective''' || Why this pass existed (1–2 sentences)
|-
|-
| '''Confidence / Certainty Level''' (High / Moderate / Low) for this specific report || Yes || Distinct from `review_confidence` on Admin Page Status — marks how well-supported this particular entry's findings are.
| '''Reviewer''' || Name; AI models + role if any
|-
|-
| '''Field ratings addressed''' (`instrument_grade`, `validation`, etc.) || Yes, if any field changed || Ties the report to the actual Admin Page Status change it justifies.
| '''Method''' || Solo / Round-robin / Challenge review / Checklist-only / Mixed
|-
|-
| '''What This Report Does NOT Claim''' || Yes, on significant status changes || Prevents implying more than what was actually established.
| '''Standing (this report)''' || Self-Assessment / Confirmed Rating
|-
|-
| '''Open Items''' || Yes || Prevents implying more finality than earned.
| '''Standing impact''' || No standing change / … (explicit)
|-
|-
| '''Closing line''' || Yes || `'''See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.'''`
| '''Evidence basis''' || Checklist, template verification, structural inspection, AI challenge (literal draft or summary — state which), manual test, query, …
|}
|}
 
</nowiki></pre>
== Edit Summary Standard ==
'''Summary:''' one to five sentences on outcome of '''this event''' (not a generic page blurb only — on shared hub Talk, include enough page identity to scan).
 
=== AI-reviewer attribution (when AI used) ===
'''An edit summary and a Calibration Report are a paired, inseparable unit — never one without the other.''' They serve different audiences and different moments of use, not the same purpose at different lengths.
Must state:
 
* Which model(s)
* '''Calibration Report''' — the permanent, complete record, for someone who has decided to actually read what happened and why.
* Whether each reviewed the '''literal current draft''' or only a '''summary'''
* '''Edit Summary''' — the triage layer, visible in `Special:History`, diffs, and watchlist notifications, '''before''' anyone opens the Talk page.
* '''Independent parallel''' vs '''sequential''' review
 
== Tiered body elements ==
'''The edit summary is not a shrunk-down copy of the report.''' Keep it genuinely minimal and let it point to the report, rather than duplicate it.
=== Light tier — Structural pre-cal ===
 
'''Required:''' Heading; event header; Summary; Actions performed (or equivalent); Open Items (may read “None — structural only”); closing line; paired edit summary noting structural-only / dates not advanced.
=== Required Elements of an Edit Summary ===
'''Not required:''' Full “What this report does NOT claim” unless a grade or governance claim moved; instrument_grade upgrade docs; heavy rationale essays.
 
'''Forbidden in pre-cal:''' Changing <code>review_date</code> / <code>Last Updated</code> to a new calibration stamp; rating upgrades.
=== Full tier — Development (and material freezes) ===
'''Always:''' Heading; event header; Summary; Actions performed; Reasoning / rationale as needed; Open Items; closing line; paired edit summary.
'''When material status or governance decisions:''' What this report does NOT claim; instrument_grade / validation change docs; Fields before/after table if fields moved.
'''Conditional (omit if unused):''' Nonconformance block; Development Breadcrumb block; Readiness Gap (“why not advanced”).
=== Short tier — Confirmation ===
'''Required:''' Heading (annotation Confirmation); event header with objective “re-verify on cycle”; Evidence basis; Standing impact (usually no change or list findings); Open Items; statement that re-verification occurred even if nothing failed; paired edit summary; closing line.
=== Ripple-Triggered ===
Same weight as the work done, plus '''explicit upstream citation''' (page + change that triggered review).
== Edit summary standard ==
Edit summary and Calibration Report are a '''paired unit''' when a full report is required:
* Summary: scope, version if changed, one-line nature of change, pointer that full report exists on Talk/log
* Report: permanent detail
'''Standing rule:''' Do not create a full official report without its paired edit summary, or an edit summary that claims a full calibration without the report — when the pass is in a tier that requires a report. Pure minor edits remain summary-only.
== Situational section headers (vocabulary, not mandatory list) ==
Use when they improve clarity: Actions performed; Process note; instrument_grade / Validation change; Fields changed; What each reviewer contributed; Why this decision is trusted; Meta-finding worth recording; Open Items; What this report does NOT claim; Nonconformance; Development Breadcrumb; Readiness Gap.
== What disqualifies an entry from being official ==
Missing any of: heading with “Calibration Report” + page name + date; Reviewer; Method and Standing (or legacy Review Type clearly stating both); AI attribution when AI was used; Actions / Summary of changes; Open Items section where the tier requires it; paired edit summary where the tier requires a full report; editing a previous report in place instead of a new dated entry.
== Copy-paste skeleton (full tier) ==
<pre><nowiki>
== Calibration Report — [[PAGE]] — YYYY-MM-DD (Report type) ==
{| class="wikitable"
{| class="wikitable"
! Element !! Required? !! Purpose
! colspan="2" | Calibration event
|-
| '''Page''' || [[PAGE]]
|-
| '''Date''' || YYYY-MM-DD
|-
| '''Report type / tier''' || …
|-
| '''Calibration objective''' || …
|-
|-
| '''Page/scope identifier''' || Yes || What this edit concerns.
| '''Reviewer''' || …
|-
|-
| '''Version, if changed''' || Yes, if applicable || Fast visual confirmation of progression.
| '''Method''' || …
|-
|-
| '''One-line nature of change''' || Yes || Minimum needed to judge relevance while scanning history.
| '''Standing (this report)''' || Self-Assessment / Confirmed Rating
|-
|-
| '''Pointer confirming a full report exists''' || Yes || Without this, a reader of history alone won't know a fuller record exists.
| '''Standing impact''' || …
|-
| '''Evidence basis''' || …
|}
|}
'''Summary:''' …


=== Standing Rule: Generate Both Together, Every Time ===
=== Actions performed ===
* …


'''An edit summary must never be produced without its paired Calibration Report, and vice versa — both generated in the same pass, not as a follow-up request.''' A change with a summary but no report is effectively undocumented once the summary scrolls out of view; a report with no summary is invisible to anyone scanning page history. Treat the two as one inseparable output.
=== Fields and ratings (only if changed) ===
{| class="wikitable"
! Field !! Before !! After
|-
| … || … || …
|}
'''calibration_rationale:''' …
'''review_confidence:''' High / Moderate / Low


== AI-Reviewer Attribution Standard ==
=== Nonconformance ===
<!-- omit if none -->


```wikicode
=== Development Breadcrumb ===
'''AI Reviewers:'''
<!-- omit if none -->
* [Model name] — reviewed [literal current draft / a summary of the draft]
* [Model name] — reviewed [independently and in parallel / sequentially, after seeing another reviewer's response]
```


Required because ambiguity here caused at least two real corrections during this project's development — naming this explicitly every time prevents that recurring.
=== Readiness Gap ===
<!-- omit if none -->


== "What This Report Does NOT Claim" — Guidance ==
=== Open Items ===
 
* …
* A structural freeze report should state it does '''not''' thereby claim the underlying content is factually correct, only that structural/round-robin convergence occurred.
* A report raising `instrument_grade` to Confirmed should state whether that confirmation came from independent human review, AI round-robin convergence, or self-assessment alone.
* A minor correction report should state it does '''not''' constitute a full recalibration of the page.
 
== Example Section Headers (Non-Exhaustive, Situational) ==
 
The Required Elements above are the floor, not the ceiling. The headers below are drawn from real reports built across this project — a vocabulary to draw from when a report's content genuinely calls for it, not a checklist to fill out every time.
 
* '''Summary of Changes''' — the baseline factual record (required).
* '''Process Note''' — when something about *how* the report was produced needs its own explanation.
* '''instrument_grade: [Old] → [New]''' with restated `calibration_rationale` — whenever a status field actually changes.
* '''Validation: [Old] → [New]''' — same pattern, for validation specifically.
* '''The Full Arc, Summarized''' / '''The Full Process, Summarized''' — when a page went through multiple development rounds and the whole story matters, not just the latest increment.
* '''What Each Reviewer Contributed''' — when multiple reviewers each added genuinely distinct things worth attributing separately.
* '''Why This Freeze Is Trusted''' — when a freeze decision needs its own justification beyond "round-robin agreed."
* '''Meta-Finding, Worth Recording''' — when the report surfaces something bigger than the immediate change.
* '''Fields Changed''' — a compact before/after list.
* '''Open Items''' (required) — what remains unresolved.
* '''What This Report Does NOT Claim''' — required on significant status changes.
 
'''Guidance for AI reviewers specifically:''' a short report is not automatically wrong — a minor correction genuinely only needs the required elements. But a structural freeze, a multi-round development arc, or a finding with real implications beyond the immediate page should match the depth shown above, not settle for a thin summary table.
 
== What Disqualifies an Entry From Being "Official" ==
 
* No heading, or an inconsistent heading format (must include page name as literal substring, per the required format above).
* No stated Reviewer or Review Type.
* AI-assisted feedback presented without attribution to which model, or without stating literal-text-vs-summary.
* No Open Items section, on a report that clearly isn't final.
* No "What This Report Does NOT Claim" section on a significant status change.
* An edit summary produced without its paired Calibration Report, or vice versa.
* Editing a prior report's content directly, rather than adding a new dated entry (see [[Reality Override Game#Partial Update as Camouflage]]).
 
== Relationship to Other Standards ==
 
This page defines the '''shape''' of an individual report and its paired edit summary. It does not define '''when''' a report is required (see [[Decision Records: Governance Memory]]'s trigger test) or '''where''' reports should be logged (see [[Calibration Log: When to Create One]]).
 
== Calibration Dependencies ==
* [[Decision Records: Governance Memory]]
* [[Calibration Log: When to Create One]]
* [[Reference Standards]]
* [[Breadcrumb Philosophy]]
* [[Reality Override Game]]


=== What this report does NOT claim ===
* AI round-robin does not by itself create Confirmed standing.
* …
'''See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.'''
~~~~
</nowiki></pre>
== Relationship to other standards ==
* '''This page:''' shape and minimums of official reports and paired summaries.
* [[Page Structure Calibration Checklist]]: Step 0 structure — pre-cal verifies it; does not replace this report standard.
* [[Calibration Log: When to Create One]]: where reports live.
* [[Decision Records: Governance Memory]]: when certain decisions require records beyond routine cal.
* [[Nonconformance Reporting Procedure]] / [[Breadcrumb Tracking]] / [[Calibration Failure Log]]: specialized homes; event write-up still follows this format when a full report is filed.
== Open Calibration Items ==
* After a few Confirmation and Ripple reports exist, add one worked example of each light tier on Talk of this page.
* Align any remaining “Review Type only” examples in the wild to Method + Standing on contact.
''See the Page Transparency & Calibration section above for this page's Calibration Log / Decision Records / Talk links.''
'''See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.'''
'''See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.'''
{{RelatedPages}}
{{RelatedPages}}
{{Standalone Transparency}}
{{Standalone Transparency}}
{{Calibration Maintenance}}
{{Calibration Dependent}}
{{Calibration Dependent}}
{{Calibration Dependencies Display}}
{{Calibration Dependencies Display}}
 
{{Calibration Maintenance}}
{{Framework Reference}}
{{Calibration Procedure Reference}}
{{Tracking Logs Reference}}
[[Category:Meta & Framework]]
[[Category:Meta & Framework]]
{{Resource
{{Resource
| Title = Calibration Report Standard Format
| Title = Calibration Report Standard Format
| URL = https://www.thesovereigngames.com/wiki/Calibration_Report_Standard_Format
| URL = https://www.thesovereigngames.com/wiki/Calibration_Report_Standard_Format
| Description = Defines the required elements of an official Calibration Report and its paired Edit Summary — including exact heading format, AI-reviewer attribution standards, negative-scope discipline, and example section headers.
| Description = Official Calibration Report shape: heading rules, event header, procedure tiers, edit-summary pairing, AI attribution, conditional sections, anti-overclaim discipline.
| Category = Meta & Framework
| Category = Meta & Framework
}}
}}
{{Admin Page Status
{{Admin Page Status
| categorization = Done
| categorization = Done
Line 174: Line 205:
| instrument_grade = Experimental
| instrument_grade = Experimental
| validation = Low
| validation = Low
| calibration_rationale = Third major revision. Added exact heading format (page name as literal substring, for reliable Find-search) with proper Freeze/Annotation separation resolving a syntax collision in the original proposal. Added required top-of-report bulleted field order, correcting a merged Reviewer/Review Type line found in an existing report. Formalized Edit Summary as a paired, required companion to every Calibration Report, with its own required elements and a standing rule against generating one without the other. Added a non-exhaustive vocabulary of situational section headers, drawn from real reports built across this project, specifically to give AI reviewers (who have shown inconsistent report depth) a concrete standard of depth to match rather than an implied one. Not yet round-robin reviewed; existing reports not yet retroactively audited against this version.
| calibration_rationale = Merged event-centric header (objective, method vs standing, standing impact, evidence basis) into existing official-vs-informal standard. Formalized light Structural Pre-Cal and Confirmation tiers that were previously open breadcrumbs. Application Layer vocabulary aligned. Dates unchanged (development alignment of the standard text).
| review_confidence = Moderate
| review_confidence = Moderate
| review_date = {{CURRENTYEAR}}-{{CURRENTMONTH}}-{{CURRENTDAY}}
| review_date = 2026-07-20
| reviewed_by = Sovereign
| reviewed_by = Sovereign
| priority = Core
| priority = Core
Line 190: Line 221:
| terminology_consistent = Yes
| terminology_consistent = Yes
| standing_check = Self-assessed only
| standing_check = Self-assessed only
| drift_report_status = None open
| drift_report_status = Breadcrumb-Open
| depends_on = Decision Records: Governance Memory; Calibration Log: When to Create One; Reference Standards
| depends_on = Decision Records: Governance Memory; Calibration Log: When to Create One; Page Structure Calibration Checklist; Nonconformance Reporting Procedure
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 08:54, 24 July 2026

CYCLE Calibration position — Active Development

This page is a conceptual instrument under Permanent Beta. It declares a real calibration position, not a finished product waiting to ship. Checking continues; an edit is only required when evidence demands it. Stage: Seed to Fruit.

Feedback welcome — especially clarity, failure modes, and calibration gaps. Use discussion or Contribute.



Canonical Question: What does a Talk page entry need to contain before it counts as an official Calibration Report, rather than informal discussion?

Calibration Report Standard Format

Not everything written on a Calibration Log or hub Talk page is a Calibration Report. This page defines the required elements that make an entry official — findable, attributable, and usable as permanent calibration history — and the event-centric shape that scales from structural pre-cal to full development freezes. Visible reporting link: Operators file reports on the page’s Talk and/or Calibration Log per Calibration Log: When to Create One; this page only defines shape and minimums.



Sovereign-Games-OG-Image.jpg

Meta

Calibration Report Standard Format

Type Meta & Framework
Functional Layer Governance
Application Layer Framework Infrastructure
Category Meta & Framework
Version 0.5
Maturity Experimental
Last Calibration 2026-07-20
Status Permanent Beta
Description Required elements and event-centric shape of official Calibration Reports and paired edit summaries — heading standards, method vs standing, tiers by procedure type, AI attribution, conditional sections, negative-scope discipline.

Core Principles

  • Reality gets final vote
  • See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.
  • Permanent Beta

Navigation

Related


Principles

  • Report the calibration event, not only a software-style changelog.
  • Method (how reviewed) and Standing (Self-Assessment vs Confirmed Rating) are different fields.
  • AI round-robin or multi-model agreement does not by itself create Confirmed standing.
  • Validation may stay Low while structure is frozen — different quality dimensions advance independently.
  • Narrative once; drift_report_status for query visibility — no triple-log into Breadcrumb Tracking.
  • Conditional sections (Nonconformance, Breadcrumb, Readiness Gap, Fields table): omit entirely when unused — do not force empty “None” headings (exception: Open Items may explicitly state none / structural-only none where the tier requires the section).
  • Minor edit with no claim, rating, or status effect → edit summary only (no full report).

Heading standard

A Calibration Report heading must contain, in this order:

  1. The literal phrase Calibration Report
  2. The exact page name (searchable substring)
  3. The date in YYYY-MM-DD

Optional annotation in parentheses: report type / tier (e.g. Structural Pre-Cal, Structural Freeze, Confirmation, Ripple-Triggered, Nonconformance). Valid examples:

  • == Calibration Report — Slave Owner Game/Effects — 2026-07-14 ==
  • == Calibration Report — Slave Owner Game/Effects — 2026-07-14 (Structural Freeze) ==
  • == Calibration Report — Calibration Report Standard Format — 2026-07-24 (Standard merge) ==

Calibration procedure types

Type Trigger Touches review_date / Last Calibration? Report weight
Pre-Calibration Check (pre-cal) Before content/governance work; structure only Never Light tier (below)
Development Building or revising claims, definitions, structure Yes, when this pass is a real content/governance calibration Full core + contextual as applicable
Confirmation Cycle due / overdue; re-verify without intending content change Yes, when re-verification is performed (including “nothing wrong”) Short confirmation tier — silent “all fine” is not allowed
Ripple-Triggered Upstream Core dependency calibration per dependency rules Per whether content/status actually changed Must cite upstream page and change; weight matches work done

Pre-cal is not a calibration. Confirmation without a short report defeats cycle tracking.

Required event header (all official reports)

Immediately under the heading, use this table (or the same fields in this order as labeled lines if a table is impractical on a given Talk skin): 

{| class="wikitable"
! colspan="2" | Calibration event
|-
| '''Page''' || [[Exact page name]]
|-
| '''Date''' || YYYY-MM-DD
|-
| '''Report type / tier''' || Structural pre-cal / Development / Confirmation / Ripple-Triggered / Nonconformance / … 
|-
| '''Calibration objective''' || Why this pass existed (1–2 sentences)
|-
| '''Reviewer''' || Name; AI models + role if any
|-
| '''Method''' || Solo / Round-robin / Challenge review / Checklist-only / Mixed
|-
| '''Standing (this report)''' || Self-Assessment / Confirmed Rating
|-
| '''Standing impact''' || No standing change / … (explicit)
|-
| '''Evidence basis''' || Checklist, template verification, structural inspection, AI challenge (literal draft or summary — state which), manual test, query, …
|}

Summary: one to five sentences on outcome of this event (not a generic page blurb only — on shared hub Talk, include enough page identity to scan).

AI-reviewer attribution (when AI used)

Must state:

  • Which model(s)
  • Whether each reviewed the literal current draft or only a summary
  • Independent parallel vs sequential review

Tiered body elements

Light tier — Structural pre-cal

Required: Heading; event header; Summary; Actions performed (or equivalent); Open Items (may read “None — structural only”); closing line; paired edit summary noting structural-only / dates not advanced. Not required: Full “What this report does NOT claim” unless a grade or governance claim moved; instrument_grade upgrade docs; heavy rationale essays. Forbidden in pre-cal: Changing review_date / Last Updated to a new calibration stamp; rating upgrades.

Full tier — Development (and material freezes)

Always: Heading; event header; Summary; Actions performed; Reasoning / rationale as needed; Open Items; closing line; paired edit summary. When material status or governance decisions: What this report does NOT claim; instrument_grade / validation change docs; Fields before/after table if fields moved. Conditional (omit if unused): Nonconformance block; Development Breadcrumb block; Readiness Gap (“why not advanced”).

Short tier — Confirmation

Required: Heading (annotation Confirmation); event header with objective “re-verify on cycle”; Evidence basis; Standing impact (usually no change or list findings); Open Items; statement that re-verification occurred even if nothing failed; paired edit summary; closing line.

Ripple-Triggered

Same weight as the work done, plus explicit upstream citation (page + change that triggered review).

Edit summary standard

Edit summary and Calibration Report are a paired unit when a full report is required:

  • Summary: scope, version if changed, one-line nature of change, pointer that full report exists on Talk/log
  • Report: permanent detail

Standing rule: Do not create a full official report without its paired edit summary, or an edit summary that claims a full calibration without the report — when the pass is in a tier that requires a report. Pure minor edits remain summary-only.

Situational section headers (vocabulary, not mandatory list)

Use when they improve clarity: Actions performed; Process note; instrument_grade / Validation change; Fields changed; What each reviewer contributed; Why this decision is trusted; Meta-finding worth recording; Open Items; What this report does NOT claim; Nonconformance; Development Breadcrumb; Readiness Gap.

What disqualifies an entry from being official

Missing any of: heading with “Calibration Report” + page name + date; Reviewer; Method and Standing (or legacy Review Type clearly stating both); AI attribution when AI was used; Actions / Summary of changes; Open Items section where the tier requires it; paired edit summary where the tier requires a full report; editing a previous report in place instead of a new dated entry.

Copy-paste skeleton (full tier)

== Calibration Report — [[PAGE]] — YYYY-MM-DD (Report type) ==
{| class="wikitable"
! colspan="2" | Calibration event
|-
| '''Page''' || [[PAGE]]
|-
| '''Date''' || YYYY-MM-DD
|-
| '''Report type / tier''' || …
|-
| '''Calibration objective''' || …
|-
| '''Reviewer''' || …
|-
| '''Method''' || …
|-
| '''Standing (this report)''' || Self-Assessment / Confirmed Rating
|-
| '''Standing impact''' || …
|-
| '''Evidence basis''' || …
|}
'''Summary:''' …

=== Actions performed ===
* …

=== Fields and ratings (only if changed) ===
{| class="wikitable"
! Field !! Before !! After
|-
| … || … || …
|}
'''calibration_rationale:''' …
'''review_confidence:''' High / Moderate / Low

=== Nonconformance ===
<!-- omit if none -->

=== Development Breadcrumb ===
<!-- omit if none -->

=== Readiness Gap ===
<!-- omit if none -->

=== Open Items ===
* …

=== What this report does NOT claim ===
* AI round-robin does not by itself create Confirmed standing.
* …
'''See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.'''
~~~~

Relationship to other standards

Open Calibration Items

  • After a few Confirmation and Ripple reports exist, add one worked example of each light tier on Talk of this page.
  • Align any remaining “Review Type only” examples in the wild to Method + Standing on contact.

See the Page Transparency & Calibration section above for this page's Calibration Log / Decision Records / Talk links. See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.


Structural Connections


Page Transparency & Calibration

This page is under continuous calibration in line with the Permanent Beta principle.

Public Discussion Welcome

Questions, suggestions, feedback, disagreement, and proposed improvements are welcome on the Talk page.

Light rules:

  • Prefer evidence and concrete examples over slogans.
  • Apply Diagnostic Inversion Test when criticizing — the same standard to this page that you would apply elsewhere.
  • Distinguish observation from conclusion.
  • Calibration entries and Decision Records are maintenance records; public discussion belongs in ordinary Talk threads.
  • This framework remains in Permanent Beta. Better calibration is always in scope.



Calibration Dependent

Pages that list this page as a load-bearing dependency:

Page Priority Instrument Grade Last Updated Cycle Status Drift Status
Nonconformance Reporting Procedure Core Experimental 2026-07-20 Current Breadcrumb-Open
Calibration Log: When to Create One Core Development 2026-07-13 Current Breadcrumb-Open
Decision Records: Governance Memory Core Development 2026-07-14 Current Breadcrumb-Open
Admin:Maintenance Dashboard Core Experimental 2026-07-19 Current Breadcrumb-Open
Framework Features Reference Supporting Development 2026-07-20 Current Breadcrumb-Open
Template:Calibration Maintenance Log Supporting Development 2026-07-14 Current Breadcrumb-Open

If this page is edited substantively, review the list above per the Ripple Review rule — see Calibration Dependencies: Standards and Process#Rule: Core-Priority Changes Trigger Mandatory Ripple Review.


Calibration Dependencies

Pages this page relies on as load-bearing dependencies: Decision Records: Governance Memory • Calibration Log: When to Create One • Page Structure Calibration Checklist • Nonconformance Reporting Procedure If incorrect, edit the `depends_on` field in Admin Page Status — do not edit this section directly, it is auto-generated.



Calibration References

This page is calibrated against the following core standards and reference materials:



Page Construction & Maintenance References

How we construct, maintain, and utilize each page as a self-admin control panel.

  • Distributed Instrumentation — the architectural principle behind why this page (and every page) carries its own live instrumentation, rather than relying on a separate central dashboard.
  • Page Structure Calibration Checklist — the Step 0 structural pass every page should pass before content calibration begins; this page's own structure should be checkable against it.
  • Template:New Page Seed — the seed template this page's basic structure was built from.
  • Calibration Log: When to Create One — the decision procedure this page's own Talk-only vs. dedicated-log status was decided against.
  • Framework Features Reference — maintains consistency and traceability across the framework's structural features while avoiding unnecessary maintenance overhead; consult before introducing a new structural pattern this page might otherwise duplicate.



Calibration Procedure

In development. See Calibration Procedure for current status. No formal step-by-step procedure exists yet beyond the practices demonstrated across individual pages developed during the initial creation of this project.



Tracking & Log Pages



Page Reference

Title Calibration Report Standard Format
URL https://www.thesovereigngames.com/wiki/Calibration_Report_Standard_Format
Description Official Calibration Report shape: heading rules, event header, procedure tiers, edit-summary pairing, AI attribution, conditional sections, anti-overclaim discipline.
Category Meta & Framework



Retrieved from "https://www.thesovereigngames.com/index.php?title=Calibration_Report_Standard_Format&oldid=3518"