Calibration Report Standard Format: Difference between revisions
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
Immediately below the heading, in this exact bulleted order: | Immediately below the heading, in this exact bulleted order: | ||
*Page: | *Page: [Exact Page Name] | ||
*Summary: One or two sentences — what the page is/does. | *Summary: One or two sentences — what the page is/does. | ||
*Reviewer: [Name] | *Reviewer: [Name] | ||
Revision as of 10:01, 18 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. |
Meta
Calibration Report Standard Format
| Type | Meta & Framework |
|---|---|
| Functional Layer | |
| Application Layer | Framework Infrastructure |
| Category | Meta & Framework |
| Version | 0.3 |
| Maturity | Experimental |
| Last Calibration | 2026-07-29 |
| Status | Permanent Beta |
| 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. |
Menu
Core Principles
- Reality gets final vote
- See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.
- Permanent Beta
Navigation
Related
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 part of a page's permanent calibration history.
Required Heading Format
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.
Required Top-of-Report Fields
Immediately below the heading, in this exact bulleted order:
- Page: [Exact Page Name]
- Summary: One or two sentences — what the page is/does.
- Reviewer: [Name]
- 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
| Element | Required? | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Heading with date, page, annotation (exact format above) | Yes | Anchor linking, chronological order, and precise Find-search targeting. |
| Page (real wikilink) | Yes, on any shared hub Talk page | Without this, a report on a multi-page hub log is unattributable. |
| Summary | Yes, on any shared hub Talk page | Lets a reader identify the right report without opening the linked page first. |
| Reviewer | Yes | Attributes the report to a person. |
| Review Type | Yes | States the report's own standing per Reference Standards. |
| 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. |
| Summary of Changes | Yes | The factual record of what was done. |
| Reasoning / Rationale | Yes | Preserves the "why," distinct from the "what." |
| 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. |
| Field ratings addressed (`instrument_grade`, `validation`, etc.) | Yes, if any field changed | Ties the report to the actual Admin Page Status change it justifies. |
| What This Report Does NOT Claim | Yes, on significant status changes | Prevents implying more than what was actually established. |
| Open Items | Yes | Prevents implying more finality than earned. |
| Closing line | Yes | `See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.` |
Edit Summary Standard
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.
- Calibration Report — the permanent, complete record, for someone who has decided to actually read what happened and why.
- Edit Summary — the triage layer, visible in `Special:History`, diffs, and watchlist notifications, before anyone opens the Talk page.
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.
Required Elements of an Edit Summary
| Element | Required? | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Page/scope identifier | Yes | What this edit concerns. |
| Version, if changed | Yes, if applicable | Fast visual confirmation of progression. |
| One-line nature of change | Yes | Minimum needed to judge relevance while scanning history. |
| Pointer confirming a full report exists | Yes | Without this, a reader of history alone won't know a fuller record exists. |
Standing Rule: Generate Both Together, Every Time
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.
AI-Reviewer Attribution Standard
```wikicode AI Reviewers:
- [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.
"What This Report Does NOT Claim" — Guidance
- 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
See the Game. Refuse the Game. Build Better.
Structural Connections
- Slave Owner Game
- Hidden Mastery
- Foundational Statement
- One-Way Nature of the Sovereign Games
- Slave Owner Game/Tactics
- Slave Owner Game/Effects
- Slave Owner Game/Response
- Slave Owner Game/Examples
- Slave Owner Game/Applications
- Slave Owner Game/Costs to the Player
Page Transparency & Calibration
- Calibration Log & Decision Records (via Talk Page) — This page uses Talk-only calibration tracking. Full history of reviews, version changes, calibration decisions, and any governance reasoning behind structural decisions all live on the same Talk page, per Calibration Log: When to Create One and Decision Records: Governance Memory. Not every Calibration Log entry is a Decision Record — scan the Talk page's headings for entries specifically marked as decisions; the link itself being active only confirms this page has calibration history, not that a formal decision was ever recorded.
- View Current Page History — Complete edit history.
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 References
This page is calibrated against the following core standards and reference materials:
- The Sovereign Games Framework — Overall framework philosophy and operating principles
- Permanent Beta — Core maintenance and continuous improvement standard
- Reference Standards — Principles for traceable, confirmed standards
- Calibrating Conceptual Instruments — Methodology for evaluating and refining pages
- Civilizational Traceability Hierarchy — How standards should connect to reality across levels
- Diagnostic Inversion Test — Mandatory self-application standard
- Reality Game — Foundational reality-alignment tool
- Reality Override Game — Standing discipline against protecting an existing model rather than updating it
- Observable Behavior Rule — Standing principle that diagnostics evaluate observable actions, mechanisms, and consequences, not internal motive, belief, or intent
- One-Way Nature of the Sovereign Games — Anti-capture design principles
- The Royal Cubit Civilization (Strategy) — Long-term civilizational vision and metrology metaphor
- Conceptual Instruments — Overall direction and metrology metaphor
- Breadcrumb Philosophy — Standing discipline for making unresolved questions and provisional decisions explicit
- Calibration Dependencies: Standards and Process — Rule that visible and hidden dependency lists must match, and that dependencies describe genuine reliance
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.
Page Reference
| Title | 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. |
| Category | Meta & Framework |